新能源汽车消费促进政策实施效果的区域差异性——“购买”和“使用”环节政策比较视角
|
摘要
新能源汽车产业目前还处于"技术与商业化示范"阶段,高价格与市场的低需求、高风险与消费者的低认知是其主要特征。根据"居民消费能力"和"交通承载能力"区分示范推广应用城市的区域差异性,应用双重差分模型等方法从静态和动态角度,研究分析了"购买"和"使用"环节政策在不同城市实施效果的差异性。结果表明,"购买"环节政策实施效果与城市居民消费能力呈反比,与城市交通承载压力呈正比,"使用"环节政策的实施效果与城市消费能力和交通承载压力均呈正比;"购买"和"使用"环节政策在中等居民消费能力和车辆承载压力较低的城市均有显著效果。因此,制定新能源汽车消费促进政策时应充分考虑市场内生动力,适当减少财政补贴政策力度;还应根据城市居民消费能力和交通承载压力的不同制定差异化促进政策,消费能力及车辆承载压力较低的城市应以"购买"环节政策为主;消费能力及车辆承载压力中等城市可由"购买"环节向"使用"环节转移;消费能力及车辆承载压力较高的城市则应注重培育新能源汽车市场内生动力,以"使用"环节配套设施及服务为主。
The NEV industry is in the stage of‘Technical and Commercial Demonstration’. It has characteristics of high prices,low demand,high risk and low level of consumer’s understanding. We differentiate the demonstration and application cities according to the‘resident consumption capacity’and‘traffic carrying capacity’. Then we apply the dual difference model to study the differences between the‘buy’and‘use’policies from a static and dynamic perspective. The results show that the overall effect of the ‘use’policy implementation is better than the‘purchase’link policy. The implementation effect of the ‘purchase’link policy is inversely proportional to the urban residents ’ consumption capacity, and is proportional to the urban traffic carrying pressure. The implementation effect of the ‘use’link policy is directly proportional to the urban consumption capacity and urban traffic carrying pressure. The ‘purchase’and ‘use’links have significant effects in cities with low consumption power and low vehicle carrying capacity. The new energy vehicle policy should be fully considered in the market,and the financial subsidy policy should be appropriately reduced to strengthen and improve the use of the link policy. We should also formulate a differentiated promotion policy based on the consumption power of urban residents and the pressure of urban traffic. Cities with low spending power and low vehicle carrying pressure should be based on the‘purchase’policy. Medium-sized cities with moderate spending power and moderate vehicle load can be transferred from the‘purchase’link to the‘use’link. Cities with high consumption power and high vehicle load pressure should focus on cultivating the endogenous power of the new energy vehicle market,with the main facilities and services in the‘use’link.
The NEV industry is in the stage of‘Technical and Commercial Demonstration’. It has characteristics of high prices,low demand,high risk and low level of consumer’s understanding. We differentiate the demonstration and application cities according to the‘resident consumption capacity’and‘traffic carrying capacity’. Then we apply the dual difference model to study the differences between the‘buy’and‘use’policies from a static and dynamic perspective. The results show that the overall effect of the ‘use’policy implementation is better than the‘purchase’link policy. The implementation effect of the ‘purchase’link policy is inversely proportional to the urban residents ’ consumption capacity, and is proportional to the urban traffic carrying pressure. The implementation effect of the ‘use’link policy is directly proportional to the urban consumption capacity and urban traffic carrying pressure. The ‘purchase’and ‘use’links have significant effects in cities with low consumption power and low vehicle carrying capacity. The new energy vehicle policy should be fully considered in the market,and the financial subsidy policy should be appropriately reduced to strengthen and improve the use of the link policy. We should also formulate a differentiated promotion policy based on the consumption power of urban residents and the pressure of urban traffic. Cities with low spending power and low vehicle carrying pressure should be based on the‘purchase’policy. Medium-sized cities with moderate spending power and moderate vehicle load can be transferred from the‘purchase’link to the‘use’link. Cities with high consumption power and high vehicle load pressure should focus on cultivating the endogenous power of the new energy vehicle market,with the main facilities and services in the‘use’link.
引文
[1]熊勇清,陈曼琳.新能源汽车需求市场培育的政策取向:供给侧抑或需求侧[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2016,26(5):129-137.
[2]BERGEK A,BERGGREN C.The impact of environmental policy instruments on innovation:a review of energy and automotive industry studies[J].Ecological economics,2014,106(1):112-123.
[3]NICK J.The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments[J].Ecological economics,2011,72:28-36.
[4]GASS V,SCHMIDT J,SCHMID E.Analysis of alternative policy instruments to promote electric vehicles in Austria[J].Renewable energy,2014,61(1):96-101.
[5]卢超,尤建新,戎珂,等.新能源汽车产业政策的国际比较研究[J].科研管理,2014,35(12):26-35.
[6]钟太勇,杜荣.基于博弈论的新能源汽车补贴策略研究[J].中国管理科学,2015(S1):817-822.
[7]李苏秀,刘颖琦,王静宇,等.基于市场表现的中国新能源汽车产业发展政策剖析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2016,26(9):158-166.
[8]CHORUS C G,KOETSE M J,HOEN A.Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles:comparing a utility maximization and a regret minimization model[J].Energy policy,2013,61(61):901-908.
[9]王月辉,王青.北京居民新能源汽车购买意向影响因素---基于TAM和TPB整合模型的研究[J].中国管理科学,2013(S2):691-698.
[10]孙林.基于混合CGE模型的乘用车节能减排政策分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2012,22(7):40-48.
[11]熊勇清,李小龙.新能源汽车产业供需双侧政策对潜在消费者的影响[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(6):52-62.
[12]张露,郭晴.低碳农产品消费行为:影响因素与组间差异[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(12):55-61.
[13]王建明,王俊豪.公众低碳消费模式的影响因素模型与政府管制政策---基于扎根理论的一个探索性研究[J].管理世界,2011(4):58-68.
[14]湛泳,王恬.中国经济转型背景的包容性创新[J].改革,2015(11):54-65.
[15]HOECHLE D.Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence[J].Stata journal,2007,7(3):281-312.
[16]DRACA M,MACHIN S,REENEN J V.Minimum wages and firm profitability[J].American economic journal applied economics,2011,3(1):129-151.
[17]周黎安,陈烨.中国农村税费改革的政策效果:基于双重差分模型的估计[J].经济研究,2005(8):44-53.
[2]BERGEK A,BERGGREN C.The impact of environmental policy instruments on innovation:a review of energy and automotive industry studies[J].Ecological economics,2014,106(1):112-123.
[3]NICK J.The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments[J].Ecological economics,2011,72:28-36.
[4]GASS V,SCHMIDT J,SCHMID E.Analysis of alternative policy instruments to promote electric vehicles in Austria[J].Renewable energy,2014,61(1):96-101.
[5]卢超,尤建新,戎珂,等.新能源汽车产业政策的国际比较研究[J].科研管理,2014,35(12):26-35.
[6]钟太勇,杜荣.基于博弈论的新能源汽车补贴策略研究[J].中国管理科学,2015(S1):817-822.
[7]李苏秀,刘颖琦,王静宇,等.基于市场表现的中国新能源汽车产业发展政策剖析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2016,26(9):158-166.
[8]CHORUS C G,KOETSE M J,HOEN A.Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles:comparing a utility maximization and a regret minimization model[J].Energy policy,2013,61(61):901-908.
[9]王月辉,王青.北京居民新能源汽车购买意向影响因素---基于TAM和TPB整合模型的研究[J].中国管理科学,2013(S2):691-698.
[10]孙林.基于混合CGE模型的乘用车节能减排政策分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2012,22(7):40-48.
[11]熊勇清,李小龙.新能源汽车产业供需双侧政策对潜在消费者的影响[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(6):52-62.
[12]张露,郭晴.低碳农产品消费行为:影响因素与组间差异[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(12):55-61.
[13]王建明,王俊豪.公众低碳消费模式的影响因素模型与政府管制政策---基于扎根理论的一个探索性研究[J].管理世界,2011(4):58-68.
[14]湛泳,王恬.中国经济转型背景的包容性创新[J].改革,2015(11):54-65.
[15]HOECHLE D.Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence[J].Stata journal,2007,7(3):281-312.
[16]DRACA M,MACHIN S,REENEN J V.Minimum wages and firm profitability[J].American economic journal applied economics,2011,3(1):129-151.
[17]周黎安,陈烨.中国农村税费改革的政策效果:基于双重差分模型的估计[J].经济研究,2005(8):44-53.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |