当前位置: 首页 > 未分类 > 正文

Institution Evolution,Government Role and the Development of the Private Economy: Based on Nonlinear Panel Threshold Model Regression

Institution EvolutionGovernment Role and the Development of the Private Economy: Based on Nonlinear Panel Threshold Model Regression

Zhang Huiyi 12  ZhangYouxiang1,3

1Northeast Normal UniversityChangChun,130117

2Weifang University of Science and TechnologyShouGuang,262700

3 Jilin Agricultural University,ChangChun,130118;

Abstract: Institution evolution is an important factor to promote the development of private economy. Based on the China’s provincial panel data (2002 – 2016), the panel data threshold model was constructed with the government role as the threshold variable to test the nonlinear relationship between institution evolution and the development of private economy in China. According to the result, there is a double threshold effect between institution evolution and the development of private economy. With the expansion of the government role, the positive impact of institution evolution on the development of private economy is gradually weakened. The government role is an important factor between institution evolution and the development of private economy in China. According to the above findings, actively responding to the new demands of private economy on the institution environment and adjusting the government role is the key point to promote the development of private economy. It is necessary to promote “system set” reform and enhance the synergistic effect between the institution and the government. Therefore, the institution evolution power of development of private economy would be stimulated to promote the development of private economy sustainably.

Key words: Private Economy; Institution Evolution; Government Role; Panel Threshold Model

Fund project: “The thirteenth five-year ” Social Science Project of Education Department of Jilin Province (JJKH20170328SK)

Brief introduction of author: zhang Huiyi (1986 -), female, Ph.D.,School of Economics, Northeast Normal University; Associate researcher, Jilin Home Economics Service Research Center, Jilin Agricultural University; Mainly engaged in regional economic theory and practice research; Zhang Youxiang (1971 -), male, professor and doctoral supervisor, School of Economics, Northeast Normal University; Weifang University of Science and Technology, Director of Economic Management Department, executive director of New Era Rural Revitalization and Regional Economic Development Research Institute, mainly engaged in regional economic theory and practice research.

1.Introduction

Currently, the development of private economy problem has been highly valued. On November 1, 2018, Chairman Xi Jinping convened Forum on Private Enterprises, repeatedly emphasized the important role and status of the private economy, expounded the difficulties and problems in the development of private economy. He expressed firm determination to help private enterprises to solve the practical difficulties and create better conditions. The spirit of Chairman Xi Jinping’s important speech will undoubtedly be translated into a huge practical productivity to push the private economy into the new stage of development. People in all walks of life have carried out full discussions on relevant themes such as solving the difficulties in the development of private economy and promoting the development of private economy.

The development of private economy is facing two major difficulties: first, institutional barriers such as finance, taxation and market access; Second, the implementation of government policies is not in place and the effect is not clear, which are also important factors affecting the development of private economy.

Scholars have long had a consensus on the impact of institutional evolution on the development of private economy, and the academic circle affirmed the positive impact of institution evolution on the development of private economy. However, as the provider of compulsory institutional evolution, government role is bound to be an important factor affecting the relationship between institutional evolution and the development of private economy. Therefore, an important research question is whether the positive impact of institution evolution on the development of private economy will be affected by the role of the government. Is there a threshold effect between the development of private economy and institution evolution? As a result, the relationship between institution evolution and the development of private economy is different at different levels of government role. The main purpose of this paper is to try to answer this question.

In the study of the relationship between institution evolution, the government role and the development of private economy, the academic circle has launched a multi-perspective discussion. In theoretical research, Shi Jinchuan (2004) demonstrated the mechanism of government action in the process of institution evolution promoting the development of private economy [1]27-33; The development process of private economy is that the government keeps increasing system supply, and the expansion of system supply triggers the leapfrog development of private economy (Cai Xiaoshan, 2011) [2]111-113. The development of private economy and regional institution evolution in China are progressing through continuous innovation (Wang Zhikai, 2007) [3]99-109. Scientific and rational institution innovation provides institutional dividends for the development and expansion of private economy (Wang Haibing, 2018) [4]3-14. All the above scholars affirmed the important influence of institutional evolution on the development of private economy in China. However, although the system environment of private economy in China are improved greatly, but with our country economic society into a new transition period, the lack of institutional environment is still the biggest dilemma of the development of private economy (Chen Xuehua,2003)[5] 69-72. Private economy is in urgent need to break through “the system bottleneck” stage.The government macro system , such as business access system, financing system are especially prominent in the development of private enterprises (Yang Guihong, 2006) [6]144-147. There is no denying the fact that local governments are one of the important main bodies of institution evolution. Compulsory institutional evolution dominated by the government greatly promoted the development of private economy (Chen Guoquan, 2004)[7]83-87. However, the local government has the pursuit of economic growth and maximization their own interests, which hindered the development of private economy. The development of private economy and institution evolution move onwards with the continuous adjustment of the government policy. Therefore, the local government behaviors hold dominant position in the process of institution evolution to accelerate the development of private economy. The development of private economy in China is completely under the guidance of government policies (Zheng Xiumin, 2009) [8]22-27. Local governments play an important role in the development of private economy (Acemoglu,2015) [9]1038-1086. The optimization of their behaviors can improve institutional performance (Geng Chengxuan, 2013) [10]65-68. In order to promote the sustainable and healthy development of private economy, government policy support should adapt to the institutional demand of private economy and effectively dissolve the institutional obstacles hindering the development of private economy.

There is relatively rare empirical study about relationship of institution evolution, government role and the development of private economy. Deng Hongtu (2004) constructed the mathematical model of the government and the enterprise, pointing out that the local government ideology preference play a key role in the evolution of the private economy, local government policy can affect the private enterprise’s expectations of future [11] 130-140; Yang Tianyu (2003) constructed a government objective function. Affected by economic growth, reduction of unemployment, pursuit of utility maximization and other goals, the government in transition will generate a series of institutional barriers that hinder the development of private economy [12]29-33. Cheng Junjie (2016) made an empirical research to found institution evolution and entrepreneurship have significant influences on the development of private economy, and institution evolution has significant positive effect on entrepreneurship [13]39-54.

Throughout the existing literature, the academic circle has recognized the important influence of institution evolution and the government role on the development of private economy, and most of them are independent studies on the role of institution, government and the development of private economy, ignoring the influence of government on the development of institution evolution and private economy. In terms of research methods, some scholars use the traditional linear analysis method, and few literatures use the nonlinear characteristics. However, due to the different levels of government role, the direction and degree of institution evolution in the development of private economy may be different. Therefore, based on the China’s provincial panel data (2002 – 2016), the static panel data threshold model was constructed with the government role as the threshold variable to test the nonlinear relationship between institution evolution and the development of private economy in China.

2.Model

2.1  panel threshold regression model setting

For the analysis of the impact on the development of private economy, considering the different levels of government role which bring about different influences on the development of private economy. Namely there is a threshold effect between the private economy and the government role. This paper uses threshold analysis method from the Hansen (1999) [14]345-368, the panel data threshold model was constructed with the government role as the threshold variable. The specific form of the model is as follows: 

(1)

The meaning of this model is that when the government role is less than or equal to the threshold value , the impact coefficient of institution evolution on private economy is. When the government role is greater than the threshold value, the impact coefficient of institution evolution on private economy becomes, which can be increased or decreased. In the model, represents the scale of private economy, represents the role of the government, represents institution evolution, and represents other variables affecting private economy. The subscript “it” represents the data of the year “t” in the province “i”.

Equation (1) is the panel threshold model with a single threshold value. If there is a double threshold, the model is extended to:

                                 (2)

As can be seen from equation (2), if there are two threshold values and, the impact effect of institution evolution on private economy can be divided into three intervals, corresponding to three impact coefficients, ,and.

2.2  variable selection and data description

The panel data of 30 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions in mainland China (except Tibet Autonomous region) from 2002 to 2016 were selected in this paper due to the high quality of system and homogeneity of government policies in the same province, as well as the easy availability and high reliability of data at the provincial level. The data selected in this paper are from China statistical yearbook of each year, statistical yearbooks and statistical communiques of provinces (cities and districts). The data cover 30 provinces in mainland China from 2002 to 2016, with a total of 450 sample observations. Among them, Tibet is not included due to the lack of a large number of data. Variables are selected as follows:

2.2.1. Explained variable: private economic development (PE). The proportion of private economic added value in GDP of each province (city and district) is selected to represent it.

2.2.2 Explanatory variable: institution evolution (INS). This paper mainly examines the economic operation system closely related to the development of private economy. The Chinese marketization index published by Fan Gang et al. has constructed an evaluation system covering five aspects and 25 indexes, which can better reflect the marketization degree of China and is widely used as the proxy variable of economic operation system in empirical research. The data of marketization index in this paper are from 《NERI INDEX of Marketization of China’s Provinces 2011 Report》[15]3-8 and 《Marketization Index of China’s Provinces: NERI REPORT 2016》[16]1-6. Since the statistical caliber of the marketization index data published in the two reports is not consistent, this paper uses the data reported in the two reports as the basis and obtains comparable marketization index data by calculating the growth rate in different years and regions.

2.2.3. Threshold variable: government role (POL), which is often realized through policy design, is adopted as the variable to investigate the government action. With reference to the practices of Han Yonghui et al. (2017) [17]33-48, this paper selects the number of local policies and regulations related to the development of private economy to study and explain. According to the Chinese laws and regulations database, China issued a total of 310 policies and regulations related to the development of private economy from 2002 to 2016, among which Sichuan Province, Jiangsu Pprovince, Anhui province and Guangdong Province are the most frequent policy areas. During this period, China issued a total of 172 policies and regulations related to the development of private enterprises, among which Zhejiang, Henan, Fujian and Guangdong provinces are the most frequent policy areas.

2.2.4. Control variables: innovation ability (INNO) is measured by the amount of R&D expenditure; Resource endowment (RES) is represented by coal and oil reserves per unit land area; Infrastructure levels (INFRA) are measured by the number of miles of railways and roads per unit of land area; The opening level is expressed in terms of the proportion of total imports and exports to GDP, that is, the degree of dependence on foreign trade. Educational attainment (EDU) is measured by the average number of students at institutions of higher learning per 100,000 people. In order to avoid the interference of multicollinearity, the selected control variables have little relationship with each other.

2.3  descriptive statistics of relevant variables

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Variables (2002-2016)

Variable Symbol observation mean The standard deviation The maximum value The minimum value skewness kurtosis
Institution evolution INS 450 7.69 2.65 15.67 2.45 0.64 0.06
Government role POL 450 0.987 0.0876 13 0 2.759 9.234
Private economic development PE 450 0.45 0.13 0.96 0.07 -0.06 0.48
Control variables INNO 450 233.65 324.39 2035.10 1.2 2.67 7.84
RES 450 45879.09 111669.44 677415.44 0 4.74 22.36
INFRA 450 74.95 47.41 217.67 3.48 0.55 -0.35
OPEN 450 0.32 0.39 1.72 0.03 1.95 2.91
EDU 450 2166.15 1092.63 7068.00 563.00 1.76 4.37

In order to accurately analyze the relationship between institution evolution and the development of private economy, this paper adopts the locally weighted scatter plot correction averaging method (LOWESS) for curve fitting (Figure 1), and finds that there may be a non-linear relationship between institution evolution and the development of private economy. Figure 1 shows that the slope (influence coefficient) of the curve keeps decreasing, that is, the influence of institution evolution on the development of private economy keeps decreasing, which is consistent with the test results in the following paper.

文本框: Private Economy
文本框: Figure 1 :Linear Fitting of institution evolution and private economy

3.Estimation

3.1  endogeneity test of threshold variables

According to the study of Caner and Hansen (2004) [18]813-843, threshold variables should be exogenous variables, so the endogeneity test of threshold variables should be conducted before estimating panel threshold model. Using Stata12.0 software, the test results are shown in table 2:

Table 2: Endogeneity Test of Threshold Variables

pe Coef. Robust Std.Err. Z P>|Z| [95% Conf.Interval]
pol 2.943 0.885 3.32 0.001 1.208 4.679
_cons 43.842 1.178 37.16 0.000 41.530 46.155

Table 2 shows that P=0.001, the endogeneity test results of the threshold variable are significant at 99% confidence level, that is, the threshold variable passes the endogeneity test and is strictly exogenous from the explained variable.

3.2  panel threshold regression model estimation

Using Stata12.0 software for regression, the threshold effect test results obtained by sampling 500 times with bootstrap are shown in Table 3. Here, the model is estimated in the setting of no threshold, one threshold and two thresholds. Among them, the single threshold and double threshold of the government effect of the threshold variable are significant at the significance level of 5%, and the corresponding sampling values are 0.031 and 0.042 respectively, while the triple threshold effect is not significant at the significance level of 10%, and the Value P is 0.320. Therefore, the model of institution evolution affecting the development of private economy with government role as the threshold variable will be analyzed based on the dual threshold model.

Table 3: Threshold Effect Test Results of Government Role

The number of threshold The F value The P value The critical value
1% 5% 10%
A single threshold 5.479** 0.031 7.463 4.092 3.054
Double threshold 4.501** 0.042 6.852 3.584 2.591
Triple threshold 1.208 0.320 7.451 4.238 3.060

Note: ***, **, * means significant at the significance level of 1%, 5% and 10% respectively.

Table 4 shows the government role threshold estimates and 99% confidence interval, because the two threshold estimation is when the likelihood ratio test statistics is equal to zero value, we can obtain the dual threshold estimates are 0.050 and 3.015 respectively, and government role level can be divided into three intervals,  the corresponding threshold regression equation can be represented as follow:

(3)

Table 4: Confidence Interval of Threshold Effect Estimation of Government Role

Threshold Threshold estimate 99% confidence interval
0.050 [0.00,10.00]
3.015 [0.553,10.00]

After the threshold effect test results confirm the existence of double thresholds for the government role, this paper uses the panel threshold estimation method to analyze the nonlinear impact of institution evolution on the development of private economy. The empirical results are shown in Table 5:

Table 5: Panel Threshold Estimation Results

Explanatory variables Estimated coefficient Explanatory variables Estimated coefficient
Ins_1 2.433*** (5.372) EDU 0.011*** (7.883)
Ins_2 2.153*** (4.751) OPEN -0.141 (-3.765)
Ins_3 1.717*** (3.603) INNO 0.004* (1.867)
INFRA 0.062*** (2.789) POL 0.837*** (2.973)

Note: ***, **, * means significant at the significance level of 1%, 5% and 10% respectively; This is the t value.

From the threshold estimation results of the government role, the institution evolution and the development of private economy show a positive correlation, with the expansion of the government role, the positive impact gradually weakened. Specifically, when the level of government role in a region is less than the first threshold value of 0.050, the regression coefficient of institution evolution on the development of private economy is 2.433, which is significant at the statistical level of 1%. It indicates that within this range, for everyone percentage point increase in the level of government role, the positive impact of institution evolution on the development of private economy increases by 2.433 percentage points. When the level of government role exceeds 0.050 and less than 3.015, the regression coefficient drops to 2.153, which is significant at the statistical level of 1%. When the level of government role is greater than 3.015, the regression coefficient continues to decline to 1.717, which is significant at the statistical level of 1%. At this time, everyone percentage point increase in the level of government role will lead to an increase of 1.717 percentage points in the positive impact of institution evolution on the development of private economy.

According to the estimation results of control variables, regional innovation ability has a significant positive effect on the development of private economy. Investment in scientific and technological research and development contributes to the improvement of innovation ability, which is crucial to the development of private economy. Infrastructure plays a significant positive role in the development of private economy, which has been proved by domestic and foreign scholars from both theoretical and empirical levels. As a production factor, infrastructure construction directly promotes the development of private economy, and indirectly promotes the development of private economy by reducing transaction costs. The education level has a significant positive impact on the development of private economy. The higher the education level is, the stronger the innovation ability is, thus promoting the development of private economy. In addition, the opening level is not significant, the relationship between the development of private economy and the regional opening level can’t be sure. A possible explanation is that different types of private enterprises will differ dependent for factors [19] 90-99, whether export-oriented economy to promote private economic development or inhibition is strongly associated with the type of private enterprises.

3.3 robustness analysis

Referring to the practice of Huang and Lin (2009) [20]439-466, this paper conducts robust analysis on the nonlinear relationship betweeninstitution evolution and the development of private economy by adding control variable (RES). The results in Table 7 show that: after adding the control variable (RES), the influence coefficient of each explanatory variable between institution evolution and the development of private economy is basically unchanged, which indicates that the nonlinear relationship between institution evolution and private economy development based on panel data threshold model is basically robust.

Table 7: Robustness Test of Panel Threshold Model

Explanatory variables Estimated coefficient Explanatory variables Estimated coefficient
Ins_1 2.431*** (5.348) OPEN -0.141*** (-3.751)
Ins_2 2.151*** (4.728) RES -0.000 (-0.040)
Ins_3 1.726*** (3.588) INNO 0.004*** (-1.844)
INFRA 0.062*** (-2.795) POL 0.837*** (2.974)
EDU 0.010*** (7.628)    

Note: ***, **, * means significant at the significance level of 1%, 5% and 10% respectively; This is the t value.

3.4. result analysis

According to the above empirical analysis results, there is a nonlinear dual threshold effect between institution evolution and private economic development in China, which is 0.050 and 3.015 respectively. When the level of government role is lower than 0.050, the impact coefficient of institution evolution on the development of private economy is relatively high (2.433). With the improvement of the level of government role until it crosses the second threshold value (3.015), the impact coefficient of institution evolution on the development of private economy gradually decreases to (1.717). This shows that when the government role is lower than the threshold, the institution evolution has a stronger positive impact on the development of private economy. When the government plays a higher role than the threshold, the positive effect of institution evolution on the development of private economy is weak. As for the positive effect of institution evolution on the development of private economy, there is no doubt. American economist North put forward “Institutional Determinism”, and regarded institution as the fundamental source of economic growth. The result of economic growth is triggered by institution evolution.

From the perspective of institutional economics, the development history of private economy in China is a history of institution evolution, and the efficient institution evolution is the source power of the development of private economy. The government role in the development of private economy is mainly reflected in the policy support of provincial and municipal governments, which involves market access, financing, finance, taxation, legal protection and other aspects. Since 2002 (that is, the cutoff point of empirical research in this paper), the private economy in our country has entered the phase of consolidating and deepening development, the local government launched a number of policies and regulations. Continuous optimization of the policy environment provides the institution guarantee for private economy development. It should strengthen the positive impact on the institution evolution on the private economy. However, the empirical results of this paper show that with the expansion of government role, the positive impact of institution evolution on private economy weakens.

This can be explained by the adaptability of the policy supply for the demand of private economic development, with the rapid development of private economy in our country, the demand for policy of public goods is increasing. However, there is the lag of government function transition and the transformation of government functions lags behind. The relevant supporting policy measures are not accurate enough. Hard policy unfair phenomenon, such as “Glass door”, “Revolving door” and “Spring door” influence the effects of policy implementation, and thus the positive impact of the institution evolution based on the degree of marketization on the private economy has been reduced (Jia Hongying, 2006) 104-106 [21]. All the time, although the government has issued a number of policies aimed at promoting the development of private economy, the results have been very limited. Because the policy objectives ignore the real needs of private economy, leading to the lack of conscious action of private economy micro-subjects. During the study period of this paper, the policies and measures adopted by the national and local governments at all levels in 2005 to promote the development of private economy in order to expand domestic demand did not improve the financing system environment of private economy, but increased the operating costs and risks of private enterprises. In order to promote the development of private economy continuously, it is necessary to break the original policies and measures that are not compatible with each other, and to form an intermittent equilibrium between the policy supply and the institutional demand of private economy development.

4.Conclusions and Suggestions

The main conclusions of this paper are as follows: there is a double threshold effect between institution evolution and the development of private economy, and the threshold value of government role is 0.050 and 3.015 respectively. When the government role is lower than the threshold, the institution evolution has a strong positive impact on private economy. With the expansion of the government role, the institution evolution has a weaker positive impact on private economy. The above conclusion indicates that the government role is an important factor between institution evolution and the development of private economy in China. This means that in the process of institution evolution promoting the development of private economy, the appropriate adjustment of the level of the government role should be fully considered.

Based on the above findings, the following suggestions are proposed: firstly, actively respond to the new demands of private economy on the institution environment, and adjust the government role. Faced with the changes in the international economic environment and its adverse impacts on the economy and market expectation in China, the private economy has a stronger demand for the reform of the institutional environment, which is mainly manifested in effective policy support for financing mechanism, market access mechanism, property rights protection system and other aspects.

Since August 2018, the national government has continued to focus on the development of private economy, making great efforts to remove institutional obstacles to the development of private economy in many ways, such as fiscal, tax, financial, approval and other aspects. To break the institutional barriers restricting the development of private economy, the government should play a better role in promoting institutional innovation to promote the development of private economy according to the operational characteristics of private enterprises.

For example, the difficulty and high cost of financing have always been the bottleneck of funds restricting the development of private economy. The government should actively support the innovation of financing system and set up innovative financial products such as bond financing support tools for private enterprises. It is necessary to relax financial market access, encourage the development of private banks and other financial institutions and guide commercial banks to increase financial innovation. Credit management system, risk control system and risk compensation system should be established to accord with the characteristics of private enterprises [22]5-14. It is also necessary to accelerate the establishment of specialized private enterprise policy banks, build financial service mechanisms within the private economic system, and enhance private enterprises’ sense of policy acquisition.

Secondly, it is necessary topromote “system set” reform and enhance the synergistic effect between the institution and the government. Therefore, the institution evolution power of development of private economy would be stimulated to promote the development of private economy sustainably. Actively promote “system set” reform which is conducive to the development of private economy, mainly includes the financial system, tax system, property rights system, market access system and the system of administrative examination and approval.

Institutional advantages should be combined with the private economy development to promote the development of private economy to a new level from the inside mechanism. It is particularly important to improve the supporting measures of government policies, the way of policy implementation and escort the “system set”. It is necessary to play the synergistic effect of institution and government, and then stimulate the institution evolution power of the sustainable development of private economy.

In the reform of deepening the financial system, local governments should play a leading and supporting role in setting up special funds for the development of private enterprises and strengthening financing guarantee funds, so as to ease the difficulty and high cost of financing for private enterprises. In the reform of strengthening the tax system, the government should improve the accuracy of fiscal and tax policy support, and effectively reduce the tax burden of private enterprises; In the reform of improving taxation system , the government should strengthen law enforcement and reduce the burden of taxes and fees practically.In the reform of perfecting the system of property right protection, the government should strengthen law enforcement, raise the cost of breaking the law and protect the innovation achievements of private enterprises to create a good environment. In the reform of market access system, adhere to the principle of ” Entry is not prohibited by law”, and create an open order of institutionalized rights and a market competition environment of non-interpersonal relationship [23]8-16. In the reform of simplifying the administrative approval system, a third-party evaluation mechanism for the reform of the administrative examination and approval system should be established to reduce the obstacles to the development of private economy.

It is a systematic project to promote “system set” reform, which involves a large number of institutional bodies. It is need the coordination and cooperation of local governments, financial institutions, tax authorities, enterprises and other entities to form a joint force to break the institutional bottleneck of the development of the private economy.

References

[1]Shi Jinchuan,Qian Tao,2004.The government role in the Development of Regional Economy — A Historical Investigation of Taizhou, Zhejiang Province from the Perspective of Market Enhancement Theory.Comparative Economic & Social Systems(3):27-33.

[2]Cai Xiaoshan,2011.Institution Evolution, Government Behavior and the Development of Private Economy in the Pearl River Delta.Modern Management Science(1):111-113.

[3]Wang Zhikai,2007.The Private Sector and China. s Institutional Transition: Case Studies in Zhejiang and Jiangsu. Journal of Zhejiang University(Humanities and Social Sciences)3,99-109.

[4]Wang Haibing,Yang Huixin,2018.Reform and Development of Private Economy in China from 1978 to 2017:Retrospects and Prospects. Research on Economics and Management 39(4):3-14.

[5]Chen Xuehua,2003. On the Demand of Institution Evolution to develop private economy in China. Academic Research(7):69-72.

[6]Yang Guihong,Li Linbo,2006.On External Institutional Obstacles, Internal Institutional Innovation and Private Enterprise Development in the Transition Period. Inquiry Into Economic Issues(8):144-147.

[7]Chen Guoquan,Ma Xiaoli,2004.Institutional Innovation of the Local Government and the Development of Private Economy—The Institution Track and Analysis of Wenzhou. Chinese Public Administration(6):83-87.

[8]Zheng Xiumin,Xu Xiaoming,2009. Policy Guidance or Self-development? – Exploration on Development motive force of the  Private Economy in Sixty years of New China. Social Science Front(9):22-27.

[9]Acemoglu,Egorov,Sonin,2015. Political Economy in a Changing World.Journal of Political Economy(5):1038 -1086.

[10]Geng Chengxuan,2013.Optimization and Innovation of Government Behavior in the Evolution of Private Economy System. Chinese Public Administration 2013(5):65-68.

[11]Deng Hongtu,2004.Institutional Evolution in Transitional China in terms of Private Enterprise. Social Sciences in China 2004(5):130-140.

[12]Yang Tianyu,2003.Research on Institutional Barriers to the Development of China’s Private Economy. Reform(6):29-33.

[13]Cheng Junjie,2016.Institution Evolution, Entrepreneurship and the Development of Private Economy. Economic Management 38(8):39-54.

[14]Hansen, B,1999.Threshold Effects in Non-Dynamic Panels: Estimation, Testing, and Inference.Journal of Econometrics93(2):345-368.

[15]Fan Gang ,Wang Xiaolu,Zhu Hengpeng,2011.NERI INDEX of Marketization of China’s Provinces 2011 Report. Economic Science Press, Beijing, 3-8.

[16]Wang Xiaolu,Fan Gang,Yu Jingwen,2017.Marketization Index of China’s Provinces: NERI REPORT 2016.Social Sciences Academic Press,Beijing, 1-6.

[17]Han Yonghui,Huang Liangxiong,Wang Xianbin,2017.Do Industrial Policies Promote Industrial Structure Upgrading? Theory and Evidence from China’s Development–oriented Local Government. Economic Research Journal(8):33-48

[18]Caner M.and B.E.Hansen,2004.Instrumental Variable Estimation of a Threshold Mode.Econometric Theory20(5):813-843.

[19]Zhang Weiying,Sheng Bin,2004.On Entrepreneurs: the King of Economic Growth. SDX Joint Publishing Company,Shanghai,90-99.

[20]Huang H.C.and S.C.Lin,2009.Non-linear Finance-growth Nexus:A Threshold with Instrumental Variable Approach.Economics of Transition17(3):439-466.

[21]Jia Hongying,Hu Xianzhi,2006.Make Innovations in Local Government Management and Promote the Development of the Private Economy. Chinese Public Administration(7):104-106.

[22]Liu Xianwei,Wen Fengan,2018.Difficulties and Strategies of Promoting the High–quality Development of Private Economy in the New Era. Reform(9):5-14.

[23]Guo Jingsheng,2019.High Quality Development of Private Economy: Value, Follow, Opportunity and Path. On Economic Problems(3):8-16.

本文固定链接: http://rrce.cc/2019/07/16/%ef%bb%bfinstitution-evolution%ef%bc%8cgovernment-role-and-the-development-of-the-private-economy-based-on-nonlinear-panel-threshold-model-regression/ | Journal of Rural Revitalization and County Economy

该日志由 rrcecc 于2019年07月16日发表在 未分类 分类下, 你可以发表评论,并在保留原文地址及作者的情况下引用到你的网站或博客。
原创文章转载请注明: Institution Evolution,Government Role and the Development of the Private Economy: Based on Nonlinear Panel Threshold Model Regression | Journal of Rural Revitalization and County Economy

Institution Evolution,Government Role and the Development of the Private Economy: Based on Nonlinear Panel Threshold Model Regression:等您坐沙发呢!

发表评论

快捷键:Ctrl+Enter