新质生产力发展水平、区域差异与提升路径

2023年9月,习近平总书记在黑龙江省考察调研期间强调了新质生产力这一重要概念,新质生产力是创新起主导作用,摆脱传统经济增长方式、生产力发展路径,具有高科技、高效能、高质量特征,符合新发展理念的先进生产力质态。新质生产力的提出具有全新的理论内涵和丰富的现实价值,结合习近平总书记的相关重要论述和当前中国经济发展事实,文章认为新质生产力是一个至少涵盖科技、绿色和数字三大方面的集成体,并基于科技生产力、绿色生产力和数字生产力3个一级指标构建了新质生产力的综合评价体系。文章采用改进的熵权-TOPSIS方法测度了2012—2021年我国30个省级区域的新质生产力水平,测度结果表明,我国新质生产力水平由2012年的0.302 6上升到2021年的0.874 7,年均增速为21%,对应的,科技生产力、绿色生产力和数字生产力的水平也稳步上升。研究发现,针对不同区域,东部地区新质生产力水平不仅增速最快,总量也高于中西部地区,中部地区新质生产力水平高于西部地区,但增速低于西部地区;针对具体省份,新质生产力形成了广东省和江苏省双雁领航断层式发展格局,不同省份之间的差距极大,反映了中国新质生产力水平的区域异质性。进一步研究,Kernel密度估计和Markov链分析结果表明,一方面我国省际新质生产力水平的差距有逐渐拉大趋势,但这一趋势主要存在于个别新质生产力发达和落后的省份之间,大部分中间省份差异不明显,且新质生产力发展存在俱乐部趋同现象,新质生产力发达省份之间的趋同现象更为明显;另一方面,新质生产力发展具有明显的空间外溢效应,在与邻近省份的新质生产力水平存在差异的情况下,本省的新质生产力将会受到邻近省份的影响。新质生产力水平的基尼系数计算及其分解结果表明,区域间差异是全国新质生产力发展不平衡的主要原因,也就是说当下导致新质生产力水平差异的主要原因是地区间的发展不平衡。针对上述问题,提升新质生产力的发展路径应该着重从统筹区域联动合作促进平衡发展,加大对新质生产力发展的引导力度,在新质生产力构成的三大指标上进行新部署等方面展开。

Levels of development of new quality productivity, regional differences and paths to enhancement

In September 2023, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized the important concept of new-quality productivity during his investigation in Heilongjiang Province. New-quality productivity is the advanced productive forces that play a leading role in innovation, get rid of the traditional mode of economic growth and productivity development path, and have the characteristics of high technology, high efficiency, and high quality, which are in line with the new development concept. The proposal of new quality productivity has a brand new theoretical connotation and rich practical value. Combining the relevant important exposition of the General Secretary Xi Jinping and the current facts of China’s economic development, the article argues that the new quality productivity is an integrator covering at least the three major aspects of science and technology, green and digital, and constructs a comprehensive evaluation system of new quality productivity from the three first-level indicators of scientific and technological productivity, green productivity and digital productivity. Further, the article adopts the improved entropy weight-TOPSIS method to measure the level of new quality productivity of 30 provincial-level regions in China from 2012 to 2021, and the measurement results show that the level of China’s new quality productivity rises from 0.302 6 in 2012 to 0.874 7 in 2021, with an average annual growth rate of 21%, and correspondingly the levels of science and technology productivity, green productivity and digital productivity also rise steadily. The study finds that, for different regions, the level of new quality productivity in the eastern region not only grows the fastest, but also has a higher total amount than that in the central and western regions, while the level of new quality productivity in the central region is higher than that in the western region, but the growth rate is lower than that in the western region. For specific provinces, the development pattern of new productivity is double-geese-leading in Guangdong Province and Jiangsu Province, but the gap between provinces is very large, reflecting the regional heterogeneity of China’s new productivity level. Further research, Kernel density estimation and Markov chain analysis results show that, on the one hand, China’s inter-provincial new productivity level gap has a gradually widening trend, but this trend mainly exists between individual developed and backward provinces, most of the intermediate provinces differences are not obvious, and the development of the new productivity of the club convergence phenomenon, the new productivity of the developed provinces convergence phenomenon is more obvious; on the other hand, the new productivity of the developed provinces, the new productivity of the club convergence phenomenon is more obvious. On the other hand, the development of new quality productivity has obvious spatial spillover effect, in the case of differences in the level of new quality productivity with neighboring provinces, the new quality productivity of the province will be affected by the neighboring provinces. The calculation of Gini coefficient and its decomposition results show that the inter-regional difference is the main reason for the unbalanced development of the national new productivity, which means that the main reason for the difference in the level of the new productivity is the unbalanced development of the inter-region. In view of the above problems, the development path to enhance China’s new productivity should focus on coordinating regional linkage and cooperation to promote balanced development, increasing the guidance for the development of new productivity, and making new deployments in the three major indicators of new productivity.