贸易开放对中国经济发展的重要意义不言而喻。然而，随着中国经济进入新常态，外贸增长也进入新常态，其固有特征不仅极易遭受外部需求冲击出现大幅波动，更面临主要发达国家逆全球化的新挑战，稳出口成为当前及未来一段时间内国家宏观经济调控的重要内容之一。中国外贸增长存在哪些结构性特征？是什么原因造成了出口增长的波动？外贸增长抗外部冲击的脆弱性又表现在哪些方面？该采取哪些有效措施实现我国对外贸易的可持续发展？对这些问题的研究，不仅是理解不同产品相对出口存在差异的关键，也是当前制定稳定出口、促进对外贸易可持续发展有益且适合我国国情的政策关键。2015年我们申请的国家社会科学基金一般项目“新—新贸易理论视角下的中国外贸结构转型升级研究（15BJL086）”获得立项。本书就是这一研究项目的最终成果。实际研究中，我们力求在以下几个方面做出一些具有理论创新价值和实践价值的有益探讨。

第一，为解释包括中国在内的众多发展中经济体出口增长主要以传统产品为主的原因，本书使用农业剩余劳动力非农转移作为结构转型变量，对单要素产品结构新—新贸易理论模型进行拓展，结果显示：农业剩余劳动力的非农就业有利于已有传统产品生产企业的扩张，不利于新产品生产企业的成长，是导致发展中经济体出口增长以少数传统产品为主的重要原因之一。使用1998—2013年中国微观企业数据和1995—2017年HS －6位码数据进行多种实证检验后，农业剩余劳动力非农转移的确具有促进“老”企业传统产品出口增长，而不利于潜在生产者进入市场成立“新”企业，研发和出口新产品扩张的作用。

第二，使用经济结构转型变量对新—新贸易理论出口增长国别（或地区）结构模型进行拓展后，本书发现处于经济结构转型过程中的发展中经济体，农业剩余劳动力相对越多，出口增长的扩展边际越小、集约边际越大，即存在以少数传统产品向少数国家（或地区）大量出口的现象，从而不利于出口增长国别（或地区）多元化的顺利实施。使用1995—2017年中国出口到209个国家或地区的二元边际数据进行实证检验后，农业剩余劳动力非农转移有利于集约边际出口增长，不利于扩展边际提升的结论确实成立，表明我国过去以少数传统产品向少数发达国家（或地区）大量出口的增长模式应该与当时所处的经济结构转型相关。

第三，将单要素模型拓展为偏向性技术进步的双要素（劳动、资本）模型后，本书发现偏向于密集使用要素的技术进步与比较优势一起使本国（或地区）不同行业的企业相对销售收入更大，相反偏向于原本稀缺要素的技术进步可能带来比较优势的升级。使用1995—2017年中国出口的 HS －6位码商品贸易数据、2000—2013年中国工业企业数据库与海关统计数据库的匹配数据以及细分行业数据进行实证检验后，偏向资本的技术进步对资本技术密集型产品出口增长有利，而对劳动密集型产品出口增长构成“负担”，或许可以解释中国劳动密集型产品出口增长放缓、资本技术密集型产品出口不断“扩张”这一现象。

第四，将双要素拓展为三要素（劳动、资本、中间产品）新—新贸易理论模型后，理论上由于存在进口贸易成本，为获取非负利润，应该只有生产率高的企业才能把进口的中间产品作为生产最终产品的中间投入。倘若把进口中间产品并出口最终产品的企业界定为加工贸易企业，则零利润条件要求其生产率水平更高；相反，如果加工贸易企业追寻的是生产成本最低而非生产率水平更高，极容易出现“生产率悖论”问题。再次使用上述匹配数据进行实证检验后，“生产率悖论”的确容易出现在加工贸易上。

第五，将三要素拓展为四要素（劳动、内资、外资、中间产品）的新—新贸易理论模型后，理论上外资加工贸易类企业如果“追求”成本“更低”而非生产率更高的“洼地”效应，也会出现“生产率悖论问题”。同样使用工业企业与海关统计匹配数据进行实证检验后，虽然样本期内的外资企业总体上并没有表现出明显的“生产率悖论”，但外资加工贸易企业很容易出现“生产率悖论”，尤其是进料、来料与出料加工的外资企业更是如此。

第六，从制成品贸易和服务贸易分类视角出发，本书还拓展了一个人力资本潜在优势的服务贸易出口增长模型，理论上能够出现“人力资本越多的国家（或地区），服务出口越大”的结论。使用1997—2018年中国分行业服务贸易出口数据进行实证检验后，人力资本促进我国服务贸易出口的显著作用确实存在，但是区分生产性与非生产性服务业后，人力资本促进生产性服务出口的显著作用明显低于非生产性服务出口，似乎意味着中国服务贸易部门的人力资本或有错配可能。

第七，将“一带一路”融入新—新贸易理论出口增长模型后，本书发现：随着中国和沿线国家（或地区）经贸合作逐渐走向深入，出口增长的扩展边际作用将逐渐体现，集约边际作用也将逐渐体现。使用中国和沿线国家（或地区）的92136个数据作为样本进行实证分析后，“一带一路”建设的确有利于中国和沿线国家（或地区）出口增长，但具有差异性，即更有利于沿线国家（或地区）出口增长的集约边际而非扩展边际。

第八，进一步将自贸区制度质量纳入到新—新贸易理论框架后，本书能够得出“高标准经济合作具有贸易增长效应，提升自贸协定制度质量可以起到繁荣出口增长二元边际”的初步结论。使用全球188个经济体相互间贸易增长的二元边际数据进行实证检验后，自贸区战略确实有利于各国（或地区）出口增长。只是交叉项的进一步检验结果表明，自贸区质量对高收入国家（或地区）外贸增长的拉动作用没有发展中国家（或地区）理想，对欧美国家（或地区）的效果也没有亚非国家（或地区）明显，似乎表明高收入国家（或地区）在签订高标准自贸区可能具有“保守性”和“局限性”，尤其表现在“抢占”高标准国际经贸规则制度性话语权的同时，要求其他国家（或地区）必须让渡部分主权，以获取更多的制度红利。

最后，结合上述理论和实证分析结论，本书给出了相关政策建议和未来研究展望。

关键词：中国 外贸结构 转型 升级 新—新贸易理论

Abstract

It is important of trade opening to China,s economic development.However,with China,s economy entering the new normalcy,the growth of foreign trade has also entered the new normalcy.Its inherent characteristics not onlyare larger fluctuations under －by the external demand shocks,but also are facing the new challenges of major developed countries against globalization.Stabilizing exports has become one of the important works of the country,s macroeconomic regulation.What are the structural characteristics of China,s trade growth? What causes the fluctuation of the trade? What effective measures should be taken to realize the sustainable development of export growth? The study of these problems is the key to not onlyunderstand the differences in the relative exports of different products,but also take policies that are beneficial to stabilize exports and promote the sustainable development of foreign trade.In 2015,we applied for the general project of the National Social Science Foundation of China,which name is“Study on the Transferring and Upgrading of China,s Trade Structure:Based on New－new Trade Theory”.This book is the final result of the research project.In the book,we try to make some useful discussions with the theoretical and practical value in the following aspects.

First,in order to explain why many developing countries,（or regions,）export growth mainly depends on traditional products,this book used the agricultural surplus labor as a structural transformation.After expanding the new－new trade theory model of single factor,we found that the agricultural surplus labor is more benefit to the tradition al product enterprises than the new product firms,which is one of the important reasons for the developing countries,（or regions,）export growth dominated by a small number of old products.Based on the data of China,s micro enterprises from 1998 to 2013 and the HS －6 data from 1995 to 2017,we also found the above conclusions should be right in the samples.

Second,using the variables of economic structure transformation to analyze the structure of trading partner countries（or regions）,this book found that the developing countries（or regions）have the larger the intensive margin and the smaller the extensive margin of export growth when they have the more agricultural surplus labor,i.e.there was a phenomenon of a large number of traditional products exported to a few partners of these developing countries（or regions）.Using the dual marginal data of China,s export to the 209 partners from 1995 to 2017,the above conclusions should be existed which indicates that the growth of China export a few traditional products to a few developed countries（or regions）in the past should be consistent with the economic structure transformation at that time.

Third,expanding the single factor model to the two factors（i.e.labor and capital）with biased technological progress,this book found that the biased technological progress make the larger revenue with the comparative advantage.On the contrary,if the country（or regions）took technological progress with biased scarce factor,which may lead to the upgrading of comparative advantage.Using the HS－6 data of China from 1995 to 2017,the matching data of China,s industrial enterprise database and custom statistical data from 2000 to 2013,and the data of different industries in China,we found that the biased technological progress with capital is benefit to the export growth of capital－intensive products,while is not benefit to the export growth of labor－intensive products,which may be explained that China has less export growth of the labor －intensive products and more of the capital－intensive ones.

Fourth,expanding the two factors into the three factors（i.e.labor,capital and intermediate products）,this book found that due to the existence of import trade costs,in order to obtain non negative profits,only the enterprises with higher productivity can take the imported products as the intermediate input to produce the final products.If an enterprise which import intermediate products and export final products is defined as a processing trade firm,the zero profit condition requires a higher level of productivity.On the contrary,if the processing trade enterprise pursues the lowest production cost rather than a higher level of productivity,it should be prone to“productivity paradox”.After using the above matching data for empirical test,the phenomenon of productivity paradoxis easier to appear in processing trade.

Fifth,after expanding the three factors into the four factors（i.e.labor,domestic capital,foreign capital and intermediate products）,this book found that if processing trade enterprises of the foreign firms pursue the lower cost rather than the higher productivity,they would also appear“productivity paradox”.Similarly,after using the matching data of China,s industrial enterprises and custom statistical data from 2000 to 2013,the result should be that although the foreign －capital enterprises generally do not show obvious productivity paradox,the processing trade of foreign－capital firms are prone to the paradox,especially for the imported,incoming and outgoing materials firms.

Sixth,differing the goods trade from the service,this book also expanded a service trade export growth model with the potential advantages of human capital.Theoretically,the more human capital countriescould appear the greater service export.Using the export data of China,s industrial service trade from 1997 to 2018,we found that there are the significant role of human capital in promoting the service export.But when we differentiated produce and non －produce services,the human capital had a significant role in the former other than the latter,which meant that China,s service trade sector may be a mismatch of the human capital.

Seventh,taking the Belt and Road into the new－new trade theory,this book found that the marginal role of export growth will gradually be reflectedwith the gradual deepen cooperation between China and the other countries（or regions）.Using the 92136 data of China and the other countries（or regions）,there also had a significant role in trade growth of both countries（or regions）,but it might be more benefit to the intensive margin than the extensive.

Eighth,further incorporating the quality of free trade areas（i.e.FTAs）into the new－new trade theoretical framework,this book could draw a conclusion that the higher standard FTA has trade growth effect,and improving the institutional quality of FTAs might play a role in promoting the dual marginal export growth.Using the data of 188 countries（or regions）in the world,we found that the FTAs should be conducive to the export growth of all countries（or regions）.However,the further test results of the cross items showed that the quality of FTAs has no effect of the high－income countries trade growth,and also no effect of the European and American countries（or regions）.It seemed that the high－income countries（or regions）may have conservatism and limitations in signing high －standard FTAs.These conclusions might explain some reasons of the high －income countries often requires other countries（or regions）to transfer part of their sovereignty in FTAs negotiation.

Final,combining with the above theoretical and empirical analysis,this book gave the relevant policy recommendations and future study prospects.

Key words: China;Trade Structure; Transferring; Upgrading;New－new Trade Theory