发展质量的国际比较与中国借鉴

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (6919 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract On the basis of discriminating the concept of development quality,the paper studies the factors affecting the quality of development and international comparison based on the Kuznets curve of environment and income distribution.It is found that China's development quality has experienced three stages of improvement-deterioration-improvement;China,India and the United States have U-shaped curves between development quality and economic growth,while Japan presents an inverted U-shaped curve.Further analysis finds that there is no correlation between the income gap between the United States and Japan and economic growth.The impact of economic growth on the quality of development would not change because of the income gap.Economic growth is a key factor affecting the quality of development.As the populous developing countries,China and India show consistency in the quality of development and influencing factors,and the impact of economic growth in the rising stage on the quality of development increased under the higher income gap level.Through the international comparison of the quality of development among China,Japan,America and India,it is shown that China's goal of high-quality development requires the income gap to be kept in a certain range while promoting rapid economic growth.

Key words： Development quality Economic growth Income gap International comparison

Received: 14 June 2019

PACS:

F061.3

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Xiao Zhouyan

Cite this article:

Xiao Zhouyan. International Comparison of Development Quality and Reference for Chinese[J]. , 2020, 1(2): 165-175.

URL:

http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/ OR http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/Y2020/V1/I2/165

[1]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.
[2]BARRO R J.Quality and quantity of economic growth[R].Central bank of chile,2002:3-5.
[3]MLACHILA M,TAPSOBA R,TAPSOBA S J A.A quality of growth index for developing countries:a proposal[J].Social indicators research,2014,134 (2):1-36.
[4]钞小静,任保平.中国经济增长质量的时序变化与地区差异分析[J].经济研究,2011 (4):26-40.
[5]师博,任保平.中国省际经济高质量发展的测度与分析[J].经济问题,2018 (4):1-6.
[6]陈诗一.中国各地区低碳经济转型进程评估[J].经济研究,2012 (8):32-44.
[7]BOYCE J K.Inequality as a cause of environmental degradation[J].Ecological economics,1994 (11):169-178.
[8]SEN A.On weights and measures:informational constraints in social welfare analysis[J].Econometrica,1977,45 (7):1539-1572.
[9]胡志军.基于分组数据的基尼系数估计与社会福利:1985—2009年[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2012 (9):111-121.
[10]陈享光,李克歌.经济增长与收入的公平分配——引入社会福利因素的动态分析[J].学习与探索,2014 (9):105-112.
[11]DIETZ T,ROSE E,YORK R.Environmentally efficient well-being:is there a Kuznets curve[J].Applied geography,2011,32 (1):21-28.
[12]STEINBERGER J,ROBERTS T,PETERS G,et al.Path ways of human development and carbon emissions embodied in trade[J].Nature climate change,2012,2 (2):81-85.
[13]JORGENSON A K,CLARK B.Are the economy and the environment decoupling? A comparative international study,1960—2005[J].American journal of sociology,2012,118 (1):1-44.
[14]JORGENSON A K.Inequality and the carbon intensity of human well-being[J].Journal of environmental studies & sciences,2015,5 (3):277-282.
[15]KNIGHT K,SCHOR J.Economic growth and climate change:a cross-national analysis of territorial and consumption-based carbon emissions in high-income countries[J].Sustainability,2014,6 (6):3722-3731.
[16]COMMON M.Measuring national economic performance without using prices[J].Ecological economics,2007,64 (1):92-102.
[17]臧漫丹,诸大建,刘国平.生态福祉绩效:概念、内涵及G20实证[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013,23 (5):118-124.
[18]谌伟,诸大建.中国二氧化碳排放效率低么?——基于福利视角的国际比较[J].经济与管理研究,2011 (1):56-63.
[19]刘国平,朱远.碳排放福利绩效研究:基于G20数据[J].科学学研究,2011,29 (10):1504-1510.
[20]诸大建,张帅.生态福利绩效与深化可持续发展的研究[J].同济大学学报 (社会科学版),2014,25 (5):106-115.