產業結構變動與總要素生產力之衡量－－The Krugman-Kim-Lau-Young假說之再驗證

Industrial Structure Changes and the Measurement of Total Factor Productivity Growth The Krugman Kim Lau Young Hypothesis Revisited

本文提出衡量整體經濟總要素生產力變動的新方法。此方法考量產業結構變動對整體經濟總要素生產力變動的影響，並以台灣資料作實證分析。所得結論如下：(1)若忽略產業結構變動效果，將會低估1961年至1980年間整體經濟之TFP（總要素生產力）成長率達23.23％，但在1980年至1999年間則會高估TFP達23.94％，因此採用考慮產業結構變動效果的新方法對於精確衡量整體經濟總要素生產力(TFP)的變動至關重要。(2)Krugman-Kim-Lau-Young有關新興工業化經濟體(NICs)的經濟成長屬要素推動行的假說(input-driven growth hypothesis)，再Liang(2002)及本文的研究中，甚至是Young(1994b)的研究中均無法得到實證研究的支持。(3)政府採取的產業政策及自由化政策是影響1970年至1999年間台灣產業結構變動的重要因素。同時期，政府的總體政策在促進儲蓄及投資方面亦扮演相當重要的角色。以上的結論異於Krugman在1997年所指出的NICs國家的總體及產業政策對其本身的經濟發展並無貢獻的說法。

By considering the effect of industrial structural change, this paper provides a new methodology to measure the total factor productivity (TFP) of an economy. The major conclusions are as follows: (1) Ignoring the effect of industrial structural changes underestimated the TFP growth of the whole economy of Taiwan by 23.23 percent from 1961–1980 and overestimated the TFP growth by 23.94 percent from 1980–1999. It is therefore important to consider the effect of industrial structural changes to measure the TFP growth correctly. (2) The Krugman-Kim-Lau-Young “input-driven growth” hypothesis for the NIEs is without basis, as demonstrated not only in this study but that of Liang (2002) and Young (1994b). (3) The factors that explain the effect of industrial structural changes from 1970– 1999 include government industry and liberalization policies. Moreover, the government plays an important role in promoting saving and investment. These conclusions differ with the argument offered by Krugman (1994) on the uselessness of macro and industry policies in the economic development of the NICs.