区域水-能源-粮食绿色效率、地区差异及影响因素

基于绿色发展理念建立多维角度投入-产出指标体系, 构建Meta-SSBM和Meta-Malmquist-Luenberger模型, 测度2004~2018年中国30个省(区)水-能源-粮食绿色静态和动态效率, 并运用泰尔指数分解东部、中部和西部绿色发展水平的时空分异特征.结果表明: (1)由于技术差距无效率而导致的在共同前沿和群组前沿面下的效率表现出较大差异性, 其中东部地区代表潜在的最优技术水平, 中部和西部存在被高估的风险.(2)东部地区管理无效率、中部地区技术无效率、西部地区管理和技术无效率并存分别是其无效率的主要原因.(3)东部地区水-能源-粮食绿色全要素生产率(TFP)增长最高, 其提升的主要原因是技术进步和技术差距比率的缩小; 中部和西部地区绿色TFP的降低主要源于技术进步的放缓和技术差距比率的扩大.(4)西部地区绿色TFP增长率的泰尔指数最大, 群组内差异远大于群组间差异, 尤以西部地区内部差异最明显.(5)教育支出、科技支出占财政支出比重、人均肉类产量和人均蔬菜产量与水-能源-粮食绿色TFP同向变化; 城市化率、人口密度、人均GDP则与之反向变化.

Regional water-energy-food green efficiency and heterogeneity and their influencing factors

In view of the green development concept, a multi-dimensional input-output index system was established by constructing Meta-SSBM and Meta-Malmquist-Luenberger models. The static and dynamic green efficiencies of water-energy-food across the mainland of China during 2004~2018 were evaluated. The characteristics of temporal and spatial differences at the green development level in terms of the east, central and western areas were correspondingly decomposed by the Theil index. The results show that: (1) there was a great difference in the efficiency under the meta- and group-frontier caused by the inefficiency of the technology gap, being the potential optimized technical level in the eastern area and being a risk of overestimation in both the central and western areas; (2) the inefficient implementation of both management and technology was responsible for the inefficiency in the eastern area, the central area and the western area; (3) the highest growth rate of water-energy-food green TFP in eastern area was due mainly to technological progress, and the decline in green TFP in the central and western areas due to the slow down in technological progress; (4) the Theil index of green TFP growth rate in the western area was the highest and the difference within the group was much greater than that among the groups, especially for the western area; (5) the proportion of the education and the science and technology expenditure in the fiscal expenditure, per capita meat production, and per capita vegetable production, along with the water-energy-grain green TFP, changed in the same direction, but in the opposite direction for urbanization rate, population density, and per capita GDP.