访问学者申请
EMAIL
北京大学
ENGLISH
Special Issue: Assessing Quality of Chinese Statistics
Table of Content 期刊目录
1. Understanding China’s official statistics
Xianchun Xu
Pages 63-79
2. How fast has Chinese industry grown? – The upward bias hypothesis revisited
Harry X. Wu
Pages 80-102
3. Debunking the myth about China’s low consumption
Jun Zhang & Tian Zhu
Pages 103-112
4. How large is income inequality in China: assessment on different estimates of Gini coefficient
Ximing Yue, Shi Li & Xia Gao
Pages 113-122
5. Demystify the labor statistics in China
Fang Cai, Yang Du & Meiyan Wang
Pages 123-133
6. Clarification of misled statistic data: overestimated per-capita housing area
Xin Li & Dianqing Xu
Pages 134-151
7. How big is the Chinese Government debt?
Jian Chang, Lingxiu Yang & Yiping Huang
Pages 152-171
Article Abstract 文章摘要
2. Understanding China’s official statistics
Xianchun Xu
Pages 63-79
Abstract: In response to the three influential doubts about government statistics, this article expounds the differences between relevant common economic statistical indicators and the national account indicators that reflect demand structure and national income distribution structure. The comparisons include the following aspects: the differences between household consumption expenditure from household survey and from expenditure-based GDP; the differences between total retail sales of consumer goods and final consumption expenditure from expenditure-based GDP; the differences between government expenditure from government fiscal statistics and government consumption expenditure from expenditure-based GDP; the differences between total investment in fixed assets from investment statistics and gross fixed capital formation from expenditure-based GDP; the differences between inventories and change in inventories from expenditure-based GDP; the differences between foreign trade balance from customs statistics and net exports of goods and services from expenditure-based GDP; and the differences between household disposable income from the household survey and from the Flow of Funds Table, etc. In addition, this article answers the questions proposed by the three doubts correspondingly.
Link to the original text:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538963.2013.861624
2. How fast has Chinese industry grown? – The upward bias hypothesis revisited
Harry X. Wu
Pages 80-102
Abstract: This study addresses two potential problems when single-benchmark price weights are applied to commodity indicators to assess the official estimates of China’s industrial growth, i.e., the substitution bias and the constant value-added ratio given by a fixed input–output table. It introduces the 2002 and 2007 input–output tables and price weights in order to capture changes in a more market-based pricing and more liberal policy environment following China’s WTO entry. My new findings have not only lent a further and stronger support to the upward-bias hypothesis but also confirmed the Maddison–Wu conjecture (2008) that official estimates tend to smooth out high-growth volatility. By the alternative index, the impact of external shocks to Chinese industry appears to be more pronounced than the official index.
Link to the original text:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538963.2013.860678
3. Debunking the myth about China’s low consumption
Jun Zhang & Tian Zhu
Pages 103-112
Abstract: This article argues that the generally held belief about China’s consumption being too low is a myth based on the misapplied Keynesian theory and inaccurate official statistics. The article identifies three sources of underestimation of household consumption by China’s official statistics: housing consumption is grossly underestimated, private consumption paid by companies is not accounted for, and most importantly, high income households are significantly underrepresented in the household surveys on which household consumption statistics are based. A re-estimation suggests that the rate of China’s consumption is more than 60% of GDP, not the official 48–49%, and it is comparable to the level experienced by the high income East Asian economies during their rapid growing years.
Link to the original text:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538963.2013.860679
4. How large is income inequality in China: assessment on different estimates of Gini coefficient
Ximing Yue, Shi Li & Xia Gao
Pages 113-122
Abstract: The rising income inequality in China has attracted social attentions, especially since SWUFE published the unbelievably high Gini coefficient in December 2012. In order to answer the question how large income inequality in current China is, this paper compares existing different Gini coefficients estimated from four different household surveys, which are the NBS household survey, the CHIP survey, the CHFS of SWUFE, and the CFPS of Peking University, and then assesses these household surveys themselves. The relevant evidences indicate that the national Gini coefficient in current China is between 0.47~0.52. The sampling defects of the CHFS are significantly major and that the national Gini coefficient of 0.61 published by SWUFE is seriously overestimated.
Link to the original text:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538963.2013.861625
5. Demystify the labor statistics in China
Fang Cai, Yang Du & Meiyan Wang
Pages 123-133
Abstract: In contrast to the great changes from a planning economy to market economic system, the transition in statistics system is left behind. The problem is quite serious in labor statistics. The paper reviews how the current labor statistical system collects the data and its reliability. By analyzing relevant indicators, the paper points out that policy-making based on the current labor statistics may mislead the outcomes in the Chinese labor market. To improve the labor statistics, a deep and comprehensive reform in the statistical system is required.
Link to the original text:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538963.2013.861116
6. Clarification of misled statistic data: overestimated per-capita housing area
Xin Li & Dianqing Xu
Pages 134-151
Abstract: The per-capita urban housing area determines trends in the real estate market largely. These trends are important in formulating economic policies. The China Statistical Yearbook provides two groups of data for ‘per-capita urban housing.’ The demand–supply situation of the Chinese housing market must be analyzed and predicted by using different versions of data. This study uses data from Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China, which comprise projected timing comparative data of the Chinese per-capita urban housing area, and predicts the future demand–supply situation of the Chinese housing market using the Gompertz model. The result shows that the per-capita urban housing area has declined since 2001, but the tight trend of the Chinese real estate market and the pressure of rising house prices will last for a relatively long time. The construction speed of commercial houses will only slow down if the urbanization proportion reaches 75%.
Link to the original text:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538963.2013.860681
7. How big is the Chinese Government debt?
Jian Chang, Lingxiu Yang & Yiping Huang
Pages 152-171
Abstract: China’s public debt does not provide a meaningful guidance about the government’s overall debt burden, since it also has various forms of contingent liabilities such as shortfalls in the pension fund, debts of local government investment vehicles, and nonperforming loans of the state-owned commercial banks. However, there is no authoritative data on the government’s overall debt burden. In this paper, we try to put together a complete picture by piecing together information available, following a consistent framework. Our results suggest that the Chinese Government’s total debt could be already above 100% of GDP, in contrast to the public debt/GDP ratio of 15.5. Urgent reforms are needed in order to reduce fiscal risks, although risks of debt crisis look small in the short term, given sound balance sheet of the public sector. Local governments’ borrowing without hard budget constraint presents the greatest risk to sustainability of China’s fiscal system.
Link to the original text:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538963.2013.861118
