中国经济发展质量的综合效率评价：基于并行两阶段的网络DEA模型

doi:10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2023.1144

Abstract

Abstract:

China's economy is moving towards a higher quality and more efficient development path. The existing study evaluates the quality of China's economic growth， but few reviews the quality of development. Based on the data of 30 provinces and municipalities in China from 2017 to 2021， the parallel two-stage network DEA model is used to evaluate the comprehensive efficiency of China's regional economic development quality. In this paper， economic growth， public service and residents' health are integrated into an analysis framework， and further the changes and interrelationships between economic growth efficiency， public service efficiency and residents' health efficiency are analyzed. The results show that：（1） There is 0.3969 room for improvement in the comprehensive efficiency of China's economic development quality， and the average regional efficiency shows that Eastern > Western > Central regions. （2） The improvement of comprehensive efficiency requires the combined effect of growth efficiency and health efficiency， and there is more room for improvement of health efficiency； The improvement of growth efficiency depends on the two parallel sub-stages of economic growth and public services. In the meanwhile， Midwest regions need to focus on improving the efficiency of economic growth， and the Mid-eastern regions on the efficiency of public services. （3） There are significant differences in the improvement of input-output indicators among various provinces. In short， provinces need to find a balance between the growth stage and the health stage， as well as the economic growth and public service sub-stages， and solve the problem of imbalance and inadequacy between regions and provinces by improving the efficiency of input-output indicators， so as to better promote the overall efficiency of China's economic development quality.

Key words: quality of economic development, high-quality development, growth efficiency, health efficiency, network data envelopment analysis （DEA） model

CLC Number:

F124

Shuya Yan, Guotao Yang, Xun Liang, Zhenyu Guan, Ziyan Liu. Comprehensive Efficiency Evaluation of China’s Economic Development Quality Based on Parallel Two-stage Network DEA Model[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2025, 33(7): 139-150.

Figures/Tables 7

地区	省份	投入指标				中间指标				产出指标
		投入指标				中间指标				中间产出		最终产出
		全社会就业人员	能源消耗	教育医疗支出	社会保障支出	二氧化硫	氮氧化物	每万人拥有卫生技术人员	社区服务中心数	GDP	城乡居民最低生活保障人数	预期寿命	死亡人口数	食源性疾病患者数	肺结核发病率
东部地区	北京	1	1	0.8545	0.7668	1	1	1	1	1	0.0473	1	1	1	1
	天津	1	1	0.9973	0.8127	1	1	1	1	1	0.1133	1	1	1	1
	河北	0.3621	0.2523	0.4010	0.4354	0.0697	0.1306	0.8873	1	0.9675	0.8872	1	0.2192	0.7508	0.6845
	辽宁	0.7303	0.7197	0.9601	0.7270	0.5367	0.5498	0.9674	1	0.8947	0.5117	1	0.6850	0.8853	0.8273
	上海	1	1	0.8748	0.6031	1	1	1	1	1	0.0793	1	1	1	1
	江苏	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
	浙江	0.7407	0.7657	1	0.9916	0.9418	0.9575	0.9283	1	0.9490	0.6562	0.9266	0.9532	0.8936	1
	福建	0.6972	0.6791	0.7704	0.8676	0.2263	0.5449	0.8174	0.6719	1	0.2309	1	0.5413	0.4306	0.7053
	山东	0.6956	0.6159	0.5666	0.6310	0.6237	0.6168	0.9386	1	0.9738	0.4717	1	0.6359	0.5269	1
	广东	0.5805	0.7008	0.7180	0.7700	0.4543	0.5737	0.3696	0.9381	1	0.1956	0.5073	0.6807	0.6740	1
	海南	1	1	0.8349	0.9493	1	1	1	1	1	0.5804	1	1	1	1
中部地区	山西	0.6322	0.4077	0.7623	0.7315	0.1144	0.2757	0.9872	1	0.6052	0.7988	1	0.5859	0.7155	0.7735
	吉林	0.9471	1	0.9254	0.8244	0.3847	0.5841	0.9429	1	0.4293	0.7680	0.9799	0.7751	0.8035	0.9740
	黑龙江	0.9964	0.8660	0.9333	0.7417	0.3327	0.5069	0.9243	1	0.4160	0.8928	1	0.6396	0.8382	0.7271
	安徽	0.4648	0.7147	0.7133	0.7235	0.2060	0.3246	0.7304	1	0.7982	0.7799	1	0.4192	0.5508	0.5743
	江西	0.5824	0.8312	0.5736	0.6211	0.1697	0.4212	0.7838	0.8951	0.7431	0.9680	0.9722	0.4782	0.6290	0.4708
	河南	0.9759	1	0.8471	0.8983	1	0.8912	0.7951	0.8556	0.9249	0.7869	0.8302	0.8083	1	1
	湖北	0.5490	0.6845	0.6816	0.6184	0.4524	0.6734	0.8906	0.9104	0.9802	0.6679	0.9617	0.5360	0.8165	0.6566
	湖南	0.5087	0.7569	0.6885	0.6712	0.3753	0.6069	0.8553	0.9107	0.9144	0.7686	0.8869	0.4872	0.4646	0.6026
西部地区	内蒙古	1	0.4210	1	0.9548	0.1322	0.3210	1	1	0.5306	0.9537	0.9993	0.9711	0.6585	0.8078
	广西	0.6850	0.8736	0.7901	0.8273	0.2724	0.4106	0.9609	0.8064	0.4497	1	1	0.3718	0.5028	0.5936
	重庆	0.5801	0.7452	0.6615	0.6283	0.2897	0.6215	0.9619	0.8180	1	0.7005	1	0.4282	0.4518	0.7714
	四川	0.6669	1	0.9246	0.8760	0.3955	0.7262	0.6069	1	0.6507	0.9351	0.7096	0.5764	0.7043	0.8674
	贵州	0.9665	0.9758	0.9810	1	0.4624	0.9109	0.9901	1	0.5782	1	0.9982	0.7193	0.5704	0.6059
	云南	0.7712	0.9713	0.8456	0.8462	0.2740	0.6294	0.8556	0.7305	0.4555	1	0.8522	0.5797	0.3040	0.6071
	陕西	0.5982	0.5727	0.7074	0.7109	0.1962	0.4917	0.9988	0.8494	0.8407	0.6759	0.9945	0.5670	0.7055	0.7194
	甘肃	0.6358	0.8769	1	1	0.6075	0.8300	1	1	0.6505	1	1	0.8173	0.8480	0.9399
	宁夏	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
	青海	1	0.9778	0.9852	0.9753	1	1	1	1	0.6813	0.9277	1	1	1	1
	新疆	0.9306	0.9796	0.9398	0.8984	1	1	1	1	0.5961	1	1	1	1	1

References 29

[1]	Färe R， Grosskopf S， Norris M， et al. Productivity growth， technical progress， and efficiency change in industrialized countries ［J］. The American Economic Review， 1994，84（1）：66-83.
[2]	颜鹏飞，王兵. 技术效率、技术进步与生产率增长：基于DEA的实证分析［J］. 经济研究， 2004，39（12）：55-65.
	Yan P F， Wang B. Technical efficiency， technical progress and productivity growth： An empirical analysis based on DEA［J］. Economic Research Journal， 2004，39（12）：55-65.
[3]	王兵，吴延瑞，颜鹏飞. 中国区域环境效率与环境全要素生产率增长［J］. 经济研究， 2010， 45（5）：95-109.
	Wang B， Wu Y R， Yan P F. Environmental efficiency and environmental total factor productivity growth in China’s regional economies［J］. Economic Research Journal， 2010， 45（5）：95-109.
[4]	黄繁华，郭卫军. 空间溢出视角下的生产性服务业集聚与长三角城市群经济增长效率［J］. 统计研究， 2020， 37（7）：66-79.
	Huang F H， Guo W J. Producer services agglomeration and economic growth efficiency of the Yangtze River Delta City cluster form the perspective of spatial spillover ［J］. Statistical Research， 2020， 37（7）：66-79.
[5]	刘瑞翔，安同良. 资源环境约束下中国经济增长绩效变化趋势与因素分析——基于一种新型生产率指数构建与分解方法的研究［J］.经济研究，2012，47（11）：34-47.
	Liu R X， An T L. Trend and factor analysis of chinese economic growth performance under restrictions of resource and environment：A research based on a new method of productivity index's construction and decomposition［J］. Economic Research Journal， 2012，47（11）：34-47.
[6]	Chen S， Golley J.‘Green’productivity growth in China’s industrial economy［J］. Energy Economics， 2014， 44：89-98.
[7]	李华，董艳玲. 中国经济高质量发展水平及差异探源-基于包容性绿色全要素生产率视角的考察［J］. 财经研究， 2021， 47（8）：4-18.
	Li H， Dong Y L. China’s high-quality economic development level and the source of differences： Based on the inclusive green TFP perspective［J］. Journal of Finance and Economics， 2021， 47（8）：4-18.
[8]	Shen Z， Wu H， Bai K， et al. Integrating economic， environmental and societal performance within the productivity measurement［J］. Technological Forecasting and Social Change， 2022， 176：121463.
[9]	Cheng Z， Jin W. Agglomeration economy and the growth of green total-factor productivity in Chinese industry［J］. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences， 2022， 83：101003.
[10]	杨俊，李小明，黄守军. 大数据、技术进步与经济增长——大数据作为生产要素的一个内生增长理论［J］. 经济研究， 2022， 57（4）：103-119.
	Yang J， Li X M， Huang S J. Big data， technical progress and economic growth： An endogenous growth theory introducing data as production factors［J］. Economic Research Journal， 2022， 57（4）：103-119.
[11]	朱喜安，马樱格. 数字经济对绿色全要素生产率变动的影响研究［J］. 经济问题， 2022（11）：1-11.
	Zhu X， Ma Y G. Research on the impact of digital economy on green total factor productivity［J］. On Economic Problems， 2022（11）：1-11.
[12]	Stiglitz J， Sen A K， Fitoussi J P. The measurement of economic performance and social progress revisited： reflections and overview［R］.Working Paper， HAL， 2009.
[13]	Bank World. Inclusive green growth： The pathway to sustainable development［R］.Working Paper， World Bank Group，2012.
[14]	Stiglitz J E， Fitoussi J P， Durand M. Beyond GDP： Measuring what counts for economic and social performance［M］. Paris： OECD Publishing， 2018.
[15]	Katila P， Colfer C J P， Jong W D， et al. Sustainable development goals［M］.Cambridge： Cambridge University Press， 2019.
[16]	韩君，张慧楠. 中国经济高质量发展背景下区域能源消费的测度［J］. 数量经济技术经济研究， 2019， 36（7）：42-61.
	Han J， Zhang H N. Measurement of regional energy consumption under the background of economic high-quality development in China［J］.The Journal of Quantitative & Technical Economics， 2019， 36（7）：42-61.
[17]	杨耀武，张平. 中国经济高质量发展的逻辑，测度与治理［J］. 经济研究， 2021，56（1）：26-42.
	Yang Y W， Zhang P. Logic， measurement and governance in China’s high-quality economic development［J］. Economic Research Journal， 2021，56（1）：26-42.
[18]	Barro R J. Quantity and quality of economic growth ［R］. Working Paper， Banco Central de Chile， 2000.
[19]	高鸿业.经济增长［M］//高鸿业. 西方经济学. 北京：中国人民大学出版社，2021：222-224.
	Gao H Y. Economic growth［M］//Gao H Y. Western Economics. Beijing： Renmin University of China Press， 2021： 222-224.
[20]	金碚. 关于“高质量发展”的经济学研究［J］. 中国工业经济， 2018（4）：5-18.
	Jin B.Study on the“high-quality development”eco- nomics［J］.China Industrial Economics，2018（4）：5 -18.
[21]	王一鸣. 百年大变局、高质量发展与构建新发展格局［J］. 管理世界， 2020，36（12）：1-13.
	Wang Y M. Changes unseen in a century， high-quality development， and the construction of a new development pattern［J］.Journal of Management World， 2020，36（12）：1-13.
[22]	曲卫华，颜志军. 环境污染、经济增长与医疗卫生服务对公共健康的影响分析——基于中国省际面板数据的研究［J］. 中国管理科学， 2015， 23（7）：166-176.
	Qu W H， Yan Z J. The influence of environmental pollution， economic growth and healthcare services to public health based on China’s provincial panel data［J］. Chinese Journal of Management Science， 2015， 23（7）：166-176.
[23]	杨国涛，张特，东梅.中国农业生产效率与减贫效率研究［J］.数量经济技术经济研究，2020，37（4）：46-65.
	Yang G T， Zhang T， Dong M. Research on the efficiency of agricultural production and poverty reduction in rural China［J］.The Journal of Quantitative & Technical Economics， 2020，37（4）：46-65.
[24]	Sokol O， Fr􀆪d L. DEA efficiency in agriculture： Measurement unit issues ［J］. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences， 2023， 86：101497.
[25]	Tone K. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis［J］. European Journal of Operational Research， 2001， 130（3）： 498-509.
[26]	Kao C， Hwang S N. Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis： An application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan［J］. European Journal of Operational Research， 2008， 185（1）：418-429.
[27]	Kao C. Efficiency decomposition in network data envelopment analysis： A relational model［J］. European Journal of Operational Research， 2009， 192（3）：949-962.
[28]	Tone K. Dealing with undesirable outputs in DEA： A slacks-based measure （SBM） approach［C］//Proceedings of the 3rd North American Productivity Workshop （NAPW III）， Toronto， Canada， June 23-25， 2004： 44-45.
[29]	Tone K， Tsutsui M. Dynamic DEA with network structure： A slacks-based measure approach ［J］. Omega， 2014， 42（1）：124-131.

阶段		属性	变量	单位	最大值	最小值	均值	标准误
增长质量效率	经济增长效率	投入	全社会从业人员	万人	7072.00	277.00	2544.21	1650.52
		投入	能源消费	万吨标准煤	44611.10	2080.00	15835.56	9494.23
		产出（link）	GDP	亿元	124369.70	2465.10	32467.43	25598.09
			二氧化硫	万吨	47.25	0.14	15.90	11.01
			氮氧化物	万吨	152.30	3.83	42.75	28.87
	公共服务效率	投入	教育医疗支出	亿元	5653.79	268.63	1630.64	968.05
		投入	社会保障支出	亿元	304.91	20.91	6508.64	3308.91
		产出（link）	城乡居民最低生活保障人数	万人	486.76	10.31	151.10	105.34
			社会服务中心数	个	3644.00	17.00	905.17	809.17
			每万人拥有卫生技术人员	人	132.00	50.00	74.14	12.90
居民健康效率		产出	预期寿命	年	83.67	69.54	77.86	2.78
			人口死亡数	人	757950	33488	303411	194916
			食源性疾病患者数	人	7771.00	48.00	1233.58	1326.67
			肺结核发病率	1/10万	304.94	20.91	59.98	37.35
		carryover	固定资产投资	亿元	60726.78	60726.78	2711.29	23450.31

地区	省份	综合效率	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021
东部	北京	0.6991	0.6962	0.6968	0.7008	0.7013	0.7004
	天津	0.7497	0.7452	0.7305	0.7515	0.7644	0.7568
	河北	0.2474	0.2366	0.2355	0.2654	0.2531	0.2463
	辽宁	0.6294	0.8318	0.4543	0.8957	0.4055	0.56
	上海	0.7117	0.7079	0.7036	0.7178	0.7153	0.7136
	江苏	1	1	1	1	1	1
	浙江	0.7686	0.9289	0.9073	0.9028	0.4876	0.6163
	福建	0.3974	0.4761	0.367	0.3487	0.3714	0.4239
	山东	0.5351	0.4018	0.3875	0.4503	0.7394	0.6964
	广东	0.42	0.4447	0.4302	0.4169	0.374	0.4341
	海南	0.9009	0.8701	0.8715	0.8913	0.8717	1
	均值	0.6417	0.6672	0.6168	0.6674	0.6076	0.6498
中部	山西	0.4023	0.3423	0.3933	0.3898	0.3678	0.5184
	吉林	0.532	0.3931	0.4393	0.4379	0.5489	0.8405
	黑龙江	0.5127	0.3656	0.4223	0.4334	0.4331	0.9094
	安徽	0.3918	0.3815	0.4078	0.4145	0.3487	0.4066
	江西	0.396	0.3732	0.3414	0.3659	0.4059	0.4934
	河南	0.8302	0.5973	0.6624	0.8913	1	1
	湖北	0.5079	0.4494	0.4391	0.7609	0.4623	0.4278
	湖南	0.4793	0.3655	0.3426	0.3749	0.4792	0.8343
	均值	0.5065	0.4085	0.431	0.5086	0.5057	0.6788
西部	内蒙古	0.5139	0.4962	0.5023	0.5134	0.507	0.5504
	广西	0.4361	0.3014	0.3155	0.533	0.5064	0.5243
	重庆	0.4536	0.5352	0.4988	0.4009	0.3877	0.4451
	四川	0.554	0.4851	0.8607	0.4727	0.4379	0.5138
	贵州	0.7046	0.5748	0.6359	0.6317	0.6808	1
	云南	0.472	0.2639	0.8683	0.4407	0.3725	0.4147
	陕西	0.4062	0.4552	0.4087	0.4116	0.3513	0.4042
	甘肃	0.7422	0.8564	1	0.6178	0.6341	0.6029
	宁夏	1	1	1	1	1	1
	青海	0.872	0.8598	0.8654	0.8572	0.8585	0.9194
	新疆	0.8277	0.7933	0.8374	0.8194	0.8454	0.8428
	均值	0.6348	0.6019	0.7085	0.6089	0.5983	0.6562
全国均值		0.6031	0.5743	0.6009	0.6036	0.577	0.6599

Comprehensive Efficiency Evaluation of China’s Economic Development Quality Based on Parallel Two-stage Network DEA Model

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 29

Related Articles 4

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	Miaomiao Niu,Xianchun Tan,Jianxin Guo,Kaiwei Zhu,Yonglong Cheng. The Impact of Total Carbon Control on High-Quality Development: A Study Based on China's Provincial Panel Data [J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2024, 32(9): 24-34.
[2]	Zhiyong Xu,Na Zhang,Shaoyong Zhang,Jin Wang,Shunyi Hu. Asset Structure Allocation and High-quality Development of Enterprises: Research on the Mechanism of Business Environment [J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2024, 32(10): 286-300.
[3]	XU Lin-ming, LI Mei-juan, LU Jin-cheng. Dynamic Evaluation Method Based on Grey Correlational Analysis by the Method of Balance and Approach and Improved TOPSIS Considering the Preference of the Decision Maker [J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2023, 31(3): 251-258.
[4]	SONG Yan, ZHANG Ming. Research on High-quality Development Considering Inter Regional Environmental Investment Strategy Interaction [J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2022, 30(3): 66-75.