中東歐國家是如何利用fdi來發(fā)展就業(yè)畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　中文4029字</b></p><p><b>　　外文文獻(xiàn)：</b></p><p>　　Central and Eastern European countries is how to use FDI to develop employment</p><p>　　Justin Blai

2、r</p><p>　　Date of Publication: 4 August 2009</p><p>　　A Central and Eastern European countries, FDI, output and employment data description</p><p>　　(A) changes in economic growth

3、 and employment trends described</p><p>　　From a planned economy to a market economy at the beginning, most Central and Eastern European countries have experienced serious "transformational recession.&q

4、uot; Starting in 1995, these countries have begun to resume growth in the late 1990s to the beginning of the transition to restore the level of economic development, 1995 to 2007 are in the 3-4.5% growth rate. The resump

5、tion of growth accompanied by a substantial increase in productivity, employment has had a profound impact in most countries </p><p>　　Weak employment situation with countries in stark contrast, since 1995 t

6、he GDP of these countries, especially in the economic value have experienced substantial growth. Compare Figure 1 and Figure 2, it is clear that changes in the rate of employment growth trajectory and the trajectory of t

7、he economy does not match, employment growth lagged behind economic growth, there is no doubt that the employment problem for the Central and Eastern European countries are still facing an economic developmen</p>

8、<p>　　(Two) FDI, industrial structure and employment structure description</p><p>　　The added value of a structure of three industries</p><p>　　After transformation of Central and Eastern E

9、uropean countries in economic development presents a clear "go farming" trend, either output or employment (see Table 1 and Table 2), the agricultural sector in the economic development of the position are very

10、 limited, and the proportion showing downward trend, as of 2007, studied in this paper seven in Central and Eastern European countries, agriculture accounted for the proportion of total economic value added is below 5%.

11、In addition to the Czech </p><p>　　Two three industrial employment structure</p><p>　　In the planned economy, the service industry gave way to industrial and agricultural, so the period of econo

12、mic restructuring, an important feature of labor from agriculture and industry to services flows. The proportion of service sector employment in all countries increased significantly and accounted for more than 60% were.

13、 Latvia, the lowest proportion of service sector employment, 58.7%. Therefore, regardless of the structure of output or employment from a structural point of view, the CEE </p><p>　　3 FDI in the manufacturin

14、g and distribution services</p><p>　　From the industrial distribution, since 1997, national service sector FDI overall upward trend (except for Latvia and Lithuania), in which Poland and Slovenia rising fast

15、est. Services FDI FDI stock accounted for the proportion of each country were more than 40%, of which the highest proportion of Hungary, reaching 88%. It is noteworthy that, although the proportion of national downward t

16、rend in FDI in manufacturing industry, but the economy still occupies an important position. Services and manu</p><p>　　Second, the empirical analysis</p><p>　　In our empirical study, respective

17、ly, with value-added manufacturing and services value added to the total value added ratio change indicates changes in industrial structure, but with manufacturing employment and employment services employment to the tot

18、al employment rate of change indicates structure. Employment indicators expressed in the literature there are usually two, one is to use employment statistics, and another is to choose the number of hours of social labor

19、. In order to accurately m</p><p>　　(A) FDI total scale and the scale of employment and employment structure</p><p>　　In order to investigate the scale of change on the scale of employment FDI a

20、nd employment structure changes, we build the model as follows:</p><p>　　zjyit = tntfitt + eit </p><p>　　mjyit = tntfitt + eit</p><p>　　sjyit = tntfit + eit</p><p>　　mj

21、yblit = tntfit + eit </p><p>　　sjyblit = tntfit + eit </p><p>　　Where the subscript i indicates the country, t represents time; tf represents the total stock of FDI society; 2jy, mjy, sjy denote

22、 the total social employment logarithmic scale, logarithmic scale manufacturing employment and employment services logarithmic scale ; mjyb1, sjyb1 represent manufacturing and service sector employment accounted for the

23、proportion of total employment in society.</p><p>　　Panel data analysis includes both cross-sectional and time series of factors factors, so the parameter estimates may be affected by different factors simul

24、taneously. Econometric Analysis of Panel Data are generally fixed and random effects in two forms. In this paper, the Hausman test method for determination of the model. Use measurement software stata 10.0 of Eq (1) to (

25、5) for empirical analysis, regression results are as follows:</p><p>　　Looking at the results from the regression, FDI expansion does not significantly expand the size of the total social employment. From th

26、e industry perspective, FDI scale for each 1% increase in manufacturing employment will be significantly decreased 0.053%, while the services sector increased significantly by 0.065% scale. Meanwhile, we can clearly see,

27、 FDI expansion can significantly reduce manufacturing employment rate and improve service employment rate, employment rate and FDI two departmen</p><p>　　(Two) FDI industry structure and employment and produ

28、ctivity</p><p>　　From the industry point of view to the distribution of FDI on employment, we have established the following model to further differentiate manufacturing FDI and FDI on the employment impact

29、of the structure and size of employment (measured as above):</p><p>　　mjyit = tnmfit + eit </p><p>　　mjblit = tnmfit + eit </p><p>　　msclit = tnmfit + eit</p><p>　　sjyi

30、t = tnfit + eit </p><p>　　sjyblit = tnsfit + eit </p><p>　　ssclit = tnsfit + eit </p><p>　　Where: mf, sf FDI in manufacturing and services, respectively, the scale; mscl, sscl repre

31、sent value added manufacturing and services expressed in hours of labor productivity. Regression results are as follows:</p><p>　　From the regression results, we can clearly see: First, the manufacturing sec

32、tor, the industry absorbed the scale of FDI on manufacturing employment has significant negative correlation between FDI in the sector every 1% increase in employment will decline 0.038%. Manufacturing FDI and manufactur

33、ing employment accounted for the proportion of total employment in society as a significant negative correlation, each 1% increase in manufacturing FDI, accounting for the decline in manufacturing employ</p><p

34、>　　On the whole, manufacturing FDI inflows scale not only reduces the proportion of employment in the manufacturing sector, but also in a more significant reduction in the absolute number of jobs in manufacturing. Alt

35、hough the increase in FDI in services increased services sector accounted for, but the sheer size of the sector employment changes had no significant effect. The two departments have in common is, FDI inflows can greatly

36、 improve labor productivity in this sector.</p><p>　　(Three) the technical structure of employment changes</p><p>　　From the table we can clearly see that from 1995 to 2005 among the five countr

37、ies in Central and Eastern Europe, countries experienced negative growth of total labor time (except Hungary), especially from 2000 to 2005, this trend has been further strengthened, Visible, countries are in a shrinking

38、 labor market. But it is worth noting that the growth of skilled labor is always positive, especially in the 2000-2005 growing faster, and even much higher than its value-added growth. On the other hand</p><p&

39、gt;　　Third, economic growth and employment stagnation further explanation</p><p>　　First, the value-added growth is mainly affected by the substantial increase in labor productivity, the growth in demand has

40、 not kept pace rapid productivity growth. With Table 6 we can see that the rapid growth of value added is mainly affected by the substantial increase in labor productivity, which makes these countries began to catch up w

41、ith a highly developed Western European countries in the process. However, the growth in demand has not kept pace rapid productivity growth, employment and </p><p>　　Second, the presence of labor supply and

42、demand mismatch technical structure, and with the increasing trend of economic development. Huge productivity growth, compared to Western European countries, the cost advantage has also attracted a lot of FDI and outsour

43、cing business to undertake the development, which is also concentrated in high-tech manufacturing sector. Despite the high-tech sector productivity increased rapidly, but the industry faster wage growth, making the unit

44、labor cost structur</p><p>　　Third, the high rate of employment growth in emerging industries in the job market in the weight too low to lead the community to improve the overall level of employment. From Ta

45、ble 7, we can see some emerging industries such as electrical machinery, postal and telecommunications services, financial and business services in these five countries have experienced little higher employment growth. H

46、owever, employment in these industries is relatively low ratio (Poland and Hungary electronic machiner</p><p>　　Fourth, the labor factor inputs overall contribution to economic growth is negative, but the st

47、ructural changes in the labor contribution to economic growth overall is positive. As we have seen, although in different countries and different industries, industrial structure is similar to the importance, value-added

48、 growth rate in different countries are not the same. Table 7 analyzes the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovenia four major countries in Eastern Europe, the industry added value </p><p>　　Table 7 anal

49、yzes the labor factor inputs, working hours, labor and capital inputs for structural changes in the growth rate of value-added contribution. Among them, the contribution of labor input = the contribution of working hours

50、 + labor structure contribution (mainly refers to the contribution of labor employment structure towards a higher marginal productivity of the industry shift), that is, the economic value of labor input The effects can b

51、e decomposed as the total change in the amount o</p><p>　　IV Conclusions and Implications for China</p><p>　　From this analysis can be found: First, FDI inflows in expanding the scale of employm

52、ent and no significant effect, but it can cause changes in the structure of employment, which increased the proportion of service sector employment, reduce the proportion of manufacturing employment. Secondly, the struct

53、ure of employment and the expansion of employment between the high-class and are not necessarily linked. Third, the technical structure, as the economy continues to develop, the demand for low-sk</p><p><

54、b>　　中文譯文：</b></p><p>　　中東歐國家是如何利用FDI來發(fā)展就業(yè)</p><p>　　(一)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長和就業(yè)變動趨勢描述 </p><p>　　在從計劃經(jīng)濟(jì)向市場經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型之初，中東歐大多數(shù)國家都經(jīng)歷了嚴(yán)重的“轉(zhuǎn)型衰退”。從1995年開始，這些國家開始出現(xiàn)恢復(fù)性增長，在20世紀(jì)90年代末期恢復(fù)到轉(zhuǎn)型初期的經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展水平，1995年到2

55、007年間增長速度均在3-4.5％。這種恢復(fù)性增長伴隨著生產(chǎn)率的大幅度提高，對就業(yè)產(chǎn)生了深刻的影響，大部分國家(特別是捷克、匈牙利和波蘭)就業(yè)率增長緩慢甚至處于停滯狀態(tài)。當(dāng)然受改革節(jié)奏不同的影響，不同國家具體的失業(yè)形勢也有很大差異。匈牙利和斯洛文尼亞在1995年之前失業(yè)率已經(jīng)很高，之后有所下降。捷克的失業(yè)率從1996年不到5％急速上升至1999年接近10％，這主要是受其滯后的經(jīng)濟(jì)改革和20世紀(jì)90年代末金融危機(jī)影響所致。波蘭和斯洛伐克的

56、失業(yè)率在90年代初已經(jīng)在較高的水平上，在90年代末更是升至20％，之后有所下降，即便如此，在2005年這兩個國家的失業(yè)率水平仍然維持在18％和16％。 </p><p>　　與各國疲軟的就業(yè)形勢形成鮮明對比的是，從1995年開始這些國家的GDP特別是經(jīng)濟(jì)附加值都經(jīng)歷了大幅增長。對比圖1和圖2，很顯然，就業(yè)率的變動軌跡與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長的軌跡并不吻合，就業(yè)增長嚴(yán)重滯后于經(jīng)濟(jì)增長，毫無疑問，就業(yè)問題對于中東歐國家仍然是經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)

57、展中面臨的一個重大挑戰(zhàn)。 </p><p>　　(2)FDI、產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)和就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)描述 </p><p>　　1　三次產(chǎn)業(yè)的附加值結(jié)構(gòu) </p><p>　　轉(zhuǎn)型之后的中東歐國家在經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展中呈現(xiàn)明顯的“去農(nóng)化”趨勢，無論是產(chǎn)出還是就業(yè)(見表1和表2)，農(nóng)業(yè)部門在經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展中的地位都非常有限，并且比例呈現(xiàn)下降趨勢，截至2007年，在本文所研究的七個中東歐國家中，農(nóng)業(yè)占經(jīng)濟(jì)

58、總附加值的比重都低于5％。除捷克外，制造業(yè)在所有國家中的產(chǎn)出比重都出現(xiàn)不同程度的下降，比例也低于25％。與農(nóng)業(yè)和制造業(yè)形成鮮明對照的是，服務(wù)業(yè)在經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展中的比重顯著上升，平均占到經(jīng)濟(jì)總附加值的60％以上。 </p><p>　　2　三次產(chǎn)業(yè)的就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu) </p><p>　　在計劃經(jīng)濟(jì)條件下，服務(wù)業(yè)的發(fā)展讓位于工業(yè)和農(nóng)業(yè)，因此在經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型時期，一個重要的特點(diǎn)是勞動力從農(nóng)業(yè)和工業(yè)向服務(wù)業(yè)流動。服

59、務(wù)業(yè)就業(yè)比重在所有國家都顯著提高，且占比均在60％以上。拉脫維亞服務(wù)業(yè)就業(yè)比重最低，為58.7％。因此，無論從產(chǎn)出結(jié)構(gòu)還是就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)來看，中東歐國家都已經(jīng)進(jìn)入服務(wù)業(yè)為主導(dǎo)的發(fā)展階段。 </p><p>　　3　FDI在制造業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)的分布 </p><p>　　從產(chǎn)業(yè)分布來看，自1997年以來，各國服務(wù)業(yè)FDI總體呈上升趨勢(拉脫維亞和立陶宛除外)，其中波蘭和斯洛文尼亞上升速度最快。服務(wù)業(yè)F

60、DI占各國FDI存量的比重均在40％以上，其中匈牙利比例最高，達(dá)到88％。值得注意的是，盡管各國制造業(yè)FDI占比呈下降趨勢，但是在經(jīng)濟(jì)中仍然占有重要地位。服務(wù)業(yè)和制造業(yè)FDI之和占這些國家吸引FDI總額的比重在80％以上，說明這兩大行業(yè)之外的其他部門吸引FDI非常有限。綜合前面的分析我們可以看出，制造業(yè)吸引FDI的比重與制造業(yè)在經(jīng)濟(jì)中的產(chǎn)出和就業(yè)比重并不是十分吻合。 </p><p>　　在實(shí)證研究中，分別用制造

61、業(yè)附加值和服務(wù)業(yè)附加值占社會總附加值的比率變化表示產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的變化，而用制造業(yè)就業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)就業(yè)占社會總就業(yè)的比率變化表示就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的變化。文獻(xiàn)中表述就業(yè)的指標(biāo)通常有兩種，一種是用就業(yè)人數(shù)統(tǒng)計，另一種則是選擇社會勞動時數(shù)。為了準(zhǔn)確衡量社會對勞動的需求，本文采用社會勞動小時數(shù)作為就業(yè)的衡量指標(biāo)。FDI、就業(yè)和附加值的數(shù)據(jù)均來源于歐洲統(tǒng)計局和EU klems數(shù)據(jù)庫，所使用的數(shù)據(jù)為捷克、斯洛伐克、斯洛文尼亞、波蘭、匈牙利、拉脫維亞、立陶宛七個國家1

62、997-2006的面板數(shù)據(jù)。 </p><p>　　(1)FDI總規(guī)模與就業(yè)規(guī)模和就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu) </p><p>　　為考察FDI規(guī)模變化對就業(yè)規(guī)模和就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的變化，我們建立模型如下： </p><p>　　zjyit=tntfitt+eit　 </p><p>　　mjyit=tntfitt+eit　 </p><p>

63、　　sjyit＝tntfit+eit　</p><p>　　mjyblit＝tntfit+eit </p><p>　　sjyblit＝tntfit+eit　 </p><p>　　其中，下標(biāo)i表示國家，t表示時期；tf表示社會總的FDI存量；2jy、mjy、sjy分別表示社會總就業(yè)規(guī)模取對數(shù)、制造業(yè)就業(yè)規(guī)模取對數(shù)和服務(wù)業(yè)就業(yè)規(guī)模取對數(shù)；mjyb1、sjyb1分別表

64、示制造業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)就業(yè)占社會總就業(yè)的比重。 </p><p>　　面板數(shù)據(jù)的分析同時包含了截面因素和時間序列因素，所以參數(shù)估計值可能同時受到不同因素的影響。面板數(shù)據(jù)的計量分析一般有固定效應(yīng)和隨機(jī)效應(yīng)兩種形式。本文利用Hausman檢驗方法對模型進(jìn)行判定。利用計量軟件stata 10.0對方程(1)到(5)進(jìn)行實(shí)證分析，回歸結(jié)果如下： </p><p>　　從回歸結(jié)果看，F(xiàn)DI規(guī)模的擴(kuò)大并不能

65、顯著擴(kuò)大社會總就業(yè)規(guī)模。從行業(yè)看，F(xiàn)DI規(guī)模每增加1％，制造業(yè)的就業(yè)將顯著下降0.053％，而服務(wù)業(yè)的就業(yè)規(guī)模顯著上升0.065％。同時我們可以清楚地看到，F(xiàn)DI規(guī)模的擴(kuò)大能顯著降低制造業(yè)的就業(yè)比率，并提高服務(wù)業(yè)的就業(yè)比率，兩個部門就業(yè)比率與FDI的相關(guān)系數(shù)分別為-0.012和0.035?？梢?，在中東歐地區(qū)，F(xiàn)DI總量的增加與社會總就業(yè)規(guī)模的擴(kuò)大兩者之間并沒有必然的聯(lián)系。但是FDI規(guī)模的上升的確有利于促使經(jīng)濟(jì)社會向以服務(wù)業(yè)為主導(dǎo)的就業(yè)結(jié)

66、構(gòu)轉(zhuǎn)變，在這個過程中，制造業(yè)吸納就業(yè)的能力逐漸下降。同時我們也應(yīng)該看到，社會就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的優(yōu)化與就業(yè)增長的停滯是同時存在的。 </p><p>　　(2)FDI行業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與就業(yè)和生產(chǎn)率 </p><p>　　為了從行業(yè)分布角度分析FDI對就業(yè)的影響，我們建立以下模型來進(jìn)一步區(qū)分制造業(yè)FDI和服務(wù)業(yè)FDI對就業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)和就業(yè)規(guī)模的影響(計量方法同上)： </p><p>　　m

67、jyit＝tnmfit+eit　 </p><p>　　mjblit=tnmfit+eit　 </p><p>　　msclit＝tnmfit+eit　</p><p>　　sjyit＝tnfit+eit　 </p><p>　　sjyblit=tnsfit+eit　 </p><p>　　ssclit=tnsfit+

68、eit　 </p><p>　　其中：mf、sf分別為制造業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)FDI規(guī)模；mscl、sscl分別表示制造業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)以小時附加值表示的勞動生產(chǎn)率?；貧w結(jié)果如下： </p><p>　　從回歸結(jié)果我們可以清楚地看出：首先，就制造業(yè)而言，該行業(yè)所吸收的FDI對制造業(yè)就業(yè)規(guī)模有顯著負(fù)相關(guān)關(guān)系，該部門FDI每增加1％，就業(yè)將下降0.038％。制造業(yè)FDI與制造業(yè)就業(yè)占社會總就業(yè)的比重也為顯著負(fù)

69、相關(guān)關(guān)系，每增加1％的制造業(yè)FDI，制造業(yè)就業(yè)占比將下降0.009％。同時，制造業(yè)FDI對制造業(yè)部門生產(chǎn)率的提高有顯著的正相關(guān)關(guān)系，相關(guān)系數(shù)為0.299，說明FDI的進(jìn)入對制造業(yè)部門的勞動生產(chǎn)率有顯著的促進(jìn)作用。其次，服務(wù)業(yè)FDI與服務(wù)業(yè)就業(yè)規(guī)模沒有顯著相關(guān)關(guān)系。但是，F(xiàn)DI對于該部門的就業(yè)比重增長和生產(chǎn)率提高有顯著的拉動作用，系數(shù)分別為0.024和0.284。 </p><p>　　綜合來看，制造業(yè)FDI的流入

70、規(guī)模擴(kuò)大不僅降低了制造業(yè)的就業(yè)比重，而且以更大幅度降低了制造業(yè)的絕對就業(yè)數(shù)量。服務(wù)業(yè)FDI的增加雖然提高了服務(wù)業(yè)的就業(yè)占比，但對該部門就業(yè)絕對規(guī)模的變化沒有顯著影響。兩個部門的共同之處在于，F(xiàn)DI的流入能大幅度提高本部門的勞動生產(chǎn)率。 </p><p>　　(3)就業(yè)的技術(shù)結(jié)構(gòu)變動 </p><p>　　從上表我們可以清楚地看出，1995-2005年間在中東歐五國中，各國的總勞動時間都呈負(fù)

71、增長(匈牙利除外)，特別是從2000年到2005年，這種趨勢進(jìn)一步得到加強(qiáng)，可見，各國勞動力市場都處于萎縮狀態(tài)。但是值得注意的是，高技術(shù)勞動力的增長始終為正，特別是在2000-2005年間增長得更快，甚至遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于其附加值的增長。另一方面，幾乎所有國家對低教育水平的勞動力的需求始終為負(fù)，需求增長率維持在-2％到-8％。這種變化恰恰反映了這些國家技術(shù)結(jié)構(gòu)的變化以及產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)不斷向技術(shù)密集型產(chǎn)業(yè)的變遷。 </p><p>

72、;　　二、對經(jīng)濟(jì)增長與就業(yè)停滯現(xiàn)象的進(jìn)一步解釋 </p><p>　　第一，附加值的高速增長主要受勞動生產(chǎn)率的大幅度提高，需求的增長卻跟不上生產(chǎn)率的快速增長。結(jié)合表6我們可以發(fā)現(xiàn)，附加值的高速增長主要受勞動生產(chǎn)率的大幅度提高，這使得這些國家開始了一個高度發(fā)展追趕西歐發(fā)達(dá)國家的過程。然而需求的增長卻跟不上生產(chǎn)率的快速增長，所以就業(yè)率和工作時間都出現(xiàn)縮減(最初匈牙利并沒有出現(xiàn)這種現(xiàn)象，但是在2000年到2005年間，

73、匈牙利的工作時間也在縮短)。也就是說，盡管經(jīng)濟(jì)增長速度很快，但是由于更高的勞動生產(chǎn)率的增長，使得總體的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長不足以帶動就業(yè)的增長，這是造成該地區(qū)就業(yè)增長為負(fù)的主要原因之一。 </p><p>　　第二，勞動力的供給和需求存在技術(shù)結(jié)構(gòu)不匹配現(xiàn)象，且隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展有加劇的趨勢。巨大的生產(chǎn)率增長空間、相比較西歐國家的成本優(yōu)勢也吸引了大量的FDI和承接外包業(yè)務(wù)的發(fā)展，這些也集中在制造業(yè)的高技術(shù)部門。盡管高科技部門的生產(chǎn)率

74、提高很快，但是各行業(yè)的工資增長速度更快，使得單位勞動成本結(jié)構(gòu)和相對勞動力成本都發(fā)生了變化。這意味著中東歐國家的比較成本優(yōu)勢逐漸轉(zhuǎn)移到高技術(shù)部門。正是中東歐國家大量的技術(shù)工人和受過良好教育的技師支持了這種產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的轉(zhuǎn)型。 </p><p>　　第三，就業(yè)增長率高的新興行業(yè)在就業(yè)市場中的權(quán)重過低，不足以帶動社會總體就業(yè)水平的提高。從表7中我們可以看出，一些新興行業(yè)，如電子機(jī)械、郵政和通訊服務(wù)、金融和商業(yè)服務(wù)在這五個國

75、家?guī)缀醵冀?jīng)歷了較高的就業(yè)增長。然而，這些行業(yè)的就業(yè)比率比較低(波蘭和匈牙利的電子機(jī)械、郵政和通訊行業(yè)的就業(yè)比率分別是2.3％和5.6％，波蘭和捷克的金融和商業(yè)服務(wù)行業(yè)的就業(yè)比率分別是5.5％和9.1％)。所以，盡管經(jīng)歷了較快的就業(yè)增長，這些行業(yè)吸納就業(yè)的絕對規(guī)模卻十分有限。 </p><p>　　第四，勞動要素投入對經(jīng)濟(jì)增長的貢獻(xiàn)總體為負(fù)，但勞動結(jié)構(gòu)變化對經(jīng)濟(jì)增長貢獻(xiàn)總體為正。正如我們所看到的，盡管不同國家的產(chǎn)業(yè)

76、結(jié)構(gòu)以及不同產(chǎn)業(yè)的重要性是相似的，不同國家的附加值增長率卻不盡相同。表7分析了捷克、匈牙利、波蘭和斯洛文尼亞四個中東歐主要國家各種因素對行業(yè)附加值增長率的貢獻(xiàn)度。在增長的會計核算框架下，附加值增長率是所有要素投入變化的加總，比如勞動投入由總勞動工時和勞動結(jié)構(gòu)衡量，勞動和資本貢獻(xiàn)率之外的部分用多要素生產(chǎn)率來衡量。 </p><p>　　表7分析了勞動要素投入、工作時數(shù)、勞動結(jié)構(gòu)變化以及資本投入對附加值增長率的貢獻(xiàn)度

77、。其中，勞動投入的貢獻(xiàn)度=工作時數(shù)的貢獻(xiàn)度+勞動結(jié)構(gòu)貢獻(xiàn)度(勞動結(jié)構(gòu)貢獻(xiàn)度主要指就業(yè)朝著具有更高的邊際生產(chǎn)率的行業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移)，也就是說，勞動投入對經(jīng)濟(jì)附加值的影響可以分解為總的勞動時間量的變化和勞動結(jié)構(gòu)的變化兩個因素。正如前文所提到的，除了匈牙利外，其他幾個國家的就業(yè)增長均為負(fù)，因此，我們可以判斷勞動要素的投入對于這些新興市場經(jīng)濟(jì)國家經(jīng)濟(jì)附加值增長率的貢獻(xiàn)都是為負(fù)的。捷克和波蘭的確是這種情況，在斯洛文尼亞，就業(yè)的增長貢獻(xiàn)為0，只有在匈牙利就

78、業(yè)有一個百分點(diǎn)的貢獻(xiàn)。然而不同行業(yè)之間又有顯著的差別，大多數(shù)情況下，高技術(shù)行業(yè)的勞動投入的貢獻(xiàn)都是為正的，比如在電子機(jī)械、郵電和通訊行業(yè)，服務(wù)業(yè)中的金融和商業(yè)服務(wù)行業(yè)。在匈牙利，勞動投入數(shù)量的變化甚至大于勞動力結(jié)構(gòu)變化的效應(yīng)。但是幾乎對于所有國家，勞動投入量的指標(biāo)均為負(fù)(匈牙利除外)，而勞動結(jié)構(gòu)的貢獻(xiàn)為正。這說明能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)就業(yè)增長和生產(chǎn)率同時增長的唯一途徑就是推動勞動力結(jié)構(gòu)的轉(zhuǎn)變，促使勞動力從貢獻(xiàn)率低的部門向勞動貢獻(xiàn)高的部門轉(zhuǎn)移。 <