中国县级以上行政中心迁移的特征、效应及其影响因素

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2022.02.001

Abstract

Abstract:

The scientific and reasonable siting of administrative centers directly affects the efficient allocation of resource elements, equality of basic public services, coordinated and balanced regional development, and modernization of national governance system and governance capacity. This study used spatial analysis and the difference-in-differences (DID) model to analyze the basic characteristics, mechanism, and economic effects of administrative center relocation in China since the reform and opening up in 1978. The results show that in terms of relocation characteristics, the higher the administrative level, the longer the relocation distance is, and the relocation is mainly concentrated after 2000, especially in North China, while the relocation distance in western China is generally much longer than that of other regions. In terms of relocation effects, the growth rates of population, economy, and construction land around the new administrative centers are obviously faster than that of the original administrative centers. On the whole, the relocation of administrative centers plays a certain role in promoting economic development, but there is also a clear spatial heterogeneity. In terms of the factors and mechanism of influence, the process is mainly influenced by the restriction of resources and environmental conditions, the promotion of old city planning and reconstruction, the guidance of the development and construction of new areas, the reform of the administrative system, and urban development strategies. The relocation of administrative centers is usually the result of the joint action of multiple factors.

Key words: administrative center, relocation effect, administrative division, government seat, difference-in-differences (DID) model

ZHAO Biao, WANG Kaiyong, ZHAO Yicai. Characteristics, effects, and influencing factors of the relocation of administrative centers at or above the county level in China[J].PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2022, 41(2): 185-198.

Figures/Tables 7

Fig.1

Fig.2

Tab.1

Fig.3

Fig.4

Tab.2

Tab.3

Economic growth effect of the relocation of administrative centers above the county level (including interaction terms)

变量	县级行政中心				市辖区行政中心				地级及地级以上行政中心
变量	东部	中部	西部	东北	东部	中部	西部	东北	东部	中部	西部	东北
Treated	0.091^*** (2.66)	-0.101^* (-1.80)	0.142^*** (4.33)	-0.101^** (-2.06)	0.009 (0.24)	0.043 (0.76)	-0.108 (-1.24)	-0.121^** (-2.70)	-0.011 (-0.29)	0.043 (0.76)	-0.110 (-1.27)	-0.110^** (-2.51)
Treated×scale (人口50万以下)	-0.034 (-1.02)	0.151^** (2.28)	-0.160^** (-2.16)	0.132 (1.62)	0.061 (1.50)	0.018 (0.27)	0.081 (0.73)	0.204^** (2.68)	0.081^** (2.01)	0.018 (0.27)	0.084 (0.76)	0.195^** (2.57)
Treated×scale (人口50万~100万)	0.015 (0.29)	0.116^* (1.69)	-0.186^** (-2.25)	0.090 (1.32)	0.062 (1.01)	-0.027 (-0.41)	0.137 (1.40)	0.123^* (1.90)	0.074 (1.24)	-0.027 (-0.41)	0.173^* (1.73)	0.115^* (1.77)
Treated×scale (人口100万~500万)	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Treated×scale (人口500万以上)	—	—	-0.039 (-0.99)	—	0.029 (0.39)	—	0.149^* (1.82)	—	-0.119 (-0.81)	—	0.033 (0.29)	—
ln urban	-0.042^* (-1.86)	0.027 (1.54)	0.011 (0.42)	-0.049 (-1.06)	-0.046^** (-2.04)	0.026 (1.51)	0.016 (0.62)	-0.043 (-0.91)	-0.043^* (-1.77)	0.026 (1.51)	0.021 (0.82)	-0.046 (-0.98)
ln indus	1.857^*** (9.00)	0.759^*** (3.74)	0.574^** (2.03)	0.946^*** (4.43)	1.875^*** (8.91)	0.782^*** (3.79)	0.471 (1.65)	0.919^*** (5.09)	1.772^*** (10.98)	0.782^*** (3.79)	0.446 (1.57)	0.918^*** (5.09)
ln czzc	0.065^*** (5.72)	0.128^*** (3.76)	0.093^** (1.99)	0.028 (1.65)	0.069^*** (5.76)	0.127^*** (3.71)	0.088^* (1.92)	0.027 (1.60)	0.069^*** (5.38)	0.127^*** (3.71)	0.089^* (1.95)	0.028 (1.62)
ln inv	0.086^*** (5.32)	0.074^*** (5.33)	0.052^*** (2.68)	0.094^*** (3.86)	0.091^*** (5.53)	0.074^*** (5.26)	0.054^*** (2.79)	0.099^*** (4.02)	0.087^*** (6.05)	0.074^*** (5.26)	0.054^*** (2.80)	0.097^*** (4.00)
ln wstz	0.031^*** (4.11)	0.006 (0.92)	0.014^* (1.83)	0.019^** (2.32)	0.034^*** (4.38)	0.006 (0.81)	0.014^* (1.93)	0.017^** (2.07)	0.035^*** (4.66)	0.006 (0.81)	0.015^** (2.01)	0.017^** (2.11)
ln pden	-0.031 (-1.14)	0.086^* (1.92)	-0.009 (-0.46)	0.015 (0.34)	-0.034 (-1.25)	0.082^* (1.84)	-0.011 (-0.57)	0.018 (0.40)	-0.033 (-1.32)	0.082^* (1.84)	-0.011 (-0.60)	0.017 (0.38)
常数	-0.868 (-0.98)	2.370^** (2.09)	4.299^*** (3.28)	3.023^*** (2.96)	-1.054 (-1.16)	2.297^* (1.97)	4.785^*** (3.78)	3.088^*** (3.48)	-0.554 (-0.80)	2.297^** (1.97)	4.891^*** (3.88)	3.110^*** (3.52)
时间效应固定	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是
个体效应固定	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是
N	1529	1834	1289	700	1529	1834	1289	700	1529	1834	1289	700
R²	0.963	0.977	0.964	0.973	0.962	0.977	0.964	0.973	0.962	0.977	0.964	0.973

Tab.3

References 31

[1]	王开泳, 陈田, 刘毅. “行政区划本身也是一种重要资源”的理论创新与应用[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(2):195-206. doi: 10.11821/dlyj020181380
	[ Wang Kaiyong, Chen Tian, Liu Yi. New discussion and reflection on "administrative divisionitself can be seen as a resource". Geographical Research, 2019, 38(2):195-206. ]
[2]	王开泳, 陈田. 行政区划研究的地理学支撑与展望[J]. 地理学报, 2018, 73(4):688-700. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201804008
	[ Wang Kaiyong, Chen Tian. Geographical prospects of spatial governance through a review on administrative divisions. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(4):688-700. ]
[3]	朱建华, 王开泳, 陈田. 国内外城市型政区设置研究进展与展望[J]. 地理科学进展, 2015, 34(8):987-997. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2015.08.006
	[ Zhu Jianhua, Wang Kaiyong, Chen Tian. Progress and prospects of city-type administrative region setting-up in China and abroad. Progress in Geography, 2015, 34(8):987-997. ]
[4]	Saarinen E. The city: Its growth, its decay, its future[M]. Cambridge, USA: The MIT Press, 1965.
[5]	陆玖. 吕氏春秋[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 2011.
	[ Lu Jiu. Lv's commentaries of history. Beijing, China: Zhonghua Book Company, 2011. ]
[6]	唐晓峰. 从混沌到秩序: 中国上古地理思想史述论[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 2010.
	[ Tang Xiaofeng. From chaos to order: A commentary on the thought history of ancient geography in China. Beijing, China: Zhonghua Book Company, 2010. ]
[7]	李久昌. 两京与两京之间历史地理研究 [M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2020.
	[ Li Jiuchang. Research on the historical geography between the two capitals. Beijing, China: Science Press, 2020. ]
[8]	朱惠斌. 城市行政中心区位选择与迁移类型: 以深莞惠都市区为例[J]. 热带地理, 2013, 33(5):527-532.
	[ Zhu Huibin. Types of Chinese city civil center location selection and movement: A case study of Shenzhen-Dongguan-Huizhou metropolitan. Tropical Geography, 2013, 33(5):527-532. ]
[9]	刘小康. 行政区经济、空间权力配置与复合行政 [M]. 北京: 国家行政学院出版社, 2015.
	[ Liu Xiaokang. Administrative district economy, spatial power allocation and compound administration. Beijing, China: National Academy of Governance Press, 2015. ]
[10]	张杰, 崔银江. 美国行政中心空间与规模特征及其成因研究[J]. 经济地理, 2011, 31(10):1618-1624.
	[ Zhang Jie, Cui Yinjiang. Spatial and scale characteristics of administrative center in America and its cause of formation. Economic Geography, 2011, 31(10):1618-1624. ]
[11]	赵彪. 1954年以来中国县级行政区划特征演变[J]. 经济地理, 2018, 38(2):10-17.
	[ Zhao Biao. The morphological characteristics of the Chinese county administrative divisions since founding of China. Economic Geography, 2018, 38(2):10-17. ]
[12]	James P E, Faissol S. The problem of Brazil's capital city[J]. Geographical Review, 1956, 46(3):301-317. doi: 10.2307/211882
[13]	Potts D. Capital relocation in Africa: The case of Lilongwe in Malawi[J]. The Geographical Journal, 1985, 151(2):182-196. doi: 10.2307/633532
[14]	Burns L S, Pang W N. Big business in the big city corporate headquarters in the CBD[J]. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 1977, 12(4):533-544. doi: 10.1177/107808747701200409
[15]	Zhu H Y, Ding S B. Reconstruction of industrial location in view of industrial agglomeration[J]. Chinese Geographical Science, 2006, 16(4):294-298. doi: 10.1007/s11769-006-0294-9
[16]	Jefferson C W, Trainor M. Public sector relocation and regional development[J]. Urban Studies, 1996, 33(1):37-48. doi: 10.1080/00420989650012103
[17]	Rérat P. The new demographic growth of cities: The case of reurbanisation in Switzerland[J]. Urban Studies, 2012, 49(5):1107-1125. doi: 10.1177/0042098011408935
[18]	Marshall J N, Bradley D, Hodgson C, et al. Relocation, relocation, relocation: Assessing the case for public sector dispersal[J]. Regional Studies, 2010, 39(6):767-787. doi: 10.1080/00343400500213663
[19]	Marshall J N. Public sector relocation policies in the UK and Ireland[J]. European Planning Studies, 2007, 15(5):645-666. doi: 10.1080/09654310701213939
[20]	杨野, 常懿心. 地方政府驻地迁移与财政支出效率[J]. 经济评论, 2021(4):131-144.
	[ Yang Ye, Chang Yixin. Local government resident relocation and fiscal expenditure efficiency. Economic Review, 2021(4):131-144. ]
[21]	王海, 尹俊雅, 洪涛. 政府驻地迁移与企业TFP: 契机还是危机?[J]. 商业经济与管理, 2021(1):85-97.
	[ Wang Hai, Yin Junya, Hong Tao. Government resident relocation and enterprise TFP: Opportunity or crisis? Journal of Business Economics, 2021(1):85-97. ]
[22]	包国宪, 王智孝. 政府迁移能否带动区域经济绩效? 基于双重差分法的实证分析[J]. 公共行政评论, 2020, 13(4):2-21, 204.
	[ Bao Guoxian, Wang Zhixiao. Can government relocation improve the economic performance of the target region? An empirical study based on the DID method. Journal of Public Administration, 2020, 13(4):2-21, 204. ]
[23]	卢盛峰, 王靖, 陈思霞. 行政中心的经济收益: 来自中国政府驻地迁移的证据[J]. 中国工业经济, 2019(11):24-41.
	[ Lu Shengfeng, Wang Jing, Chen Sixia. The economic benefits of administrative center: Evidence from the government relocation reforms in China. China Industrial Economics, 2019(11):24-41. ]
[24]	王海, 尹俊雅. 政府驻地迁移的资源配置效应[J]. 管理世界, 2018, 34(6):60-71.
	[ Wang Hai, Yin Junya. Resource allocation effect of government resident relocation. Management World, 2018, 34(6):60-71. ]
[25]	徐志伟, 刘芷菁, 张舒可. 政府驻地迁移的污染伴随效应[J]. 产业经济研究, 2020(5):86-99.
	[ Xu Zhiwei, Liu Zhijing, Zhang Shuke. Government resident relocation and pollution coupling effect. Industrial Economics Research, 2020(5):86-99. ]
[26]	王海, 尹俊雅, 陈周婷. 政府驻地迁移对企业融资约束的影响[J]. 经济社会体制比较, 2020(2):11-21.
	[ Wang Hai, Yin Junya, Chen Zhouting. How does government-led resident relocation affect corporate financing constraints? Comparative Economic & Social Systems, 2020(2):11-21. ]
[27]	周彬, 周彩. 土地财政、产业结构与经济增长: 基于284个地级以上城市数据的研究[J]. 经济学家, 2018(5):39-49.
	[ Zhou Bin, Zhou Cai. Land finance, industrial structure and economic growth: Research based on data from 284 cities at prefecture level. Economist, 2018(5):39-49. ]
[28]	郭正模, 沈茂英, 刘妍婷. 行政中心迁移对迁出地城市资源系统和经济增长的影响研究: 以成都市青羊区为例[J]. 决策咨询, 2011(4):5-10.
	[ Guo Zhengmo, Shen Maoying, Liu Yanting. Study on the impact of administrative center migration on the resource system and economic growth of the city where the administrative center is relocated: A case study of Qingyang District, Chengdu City. Decision-Making & Consultancy, 2011(4):5-10. ]
[29]	伍毅敏, 杨明, 李秀伟, 等. 新市级行政中心效应下功能集聚和产业发展模式探析: 基于7个城市的实证及对北京的启示[J]. 城市发展研究, 2020, 27(2):76-83.
	[ Wu Yimin, Yang Ming, Li Xiuwei, et al. Functional agglomeration and industrial development patterns around the new sites of municipal administrative centers: An empirical research on 7 cities and its enlightenment to Beijing. Urban Development Studies, 2020, 27(2):76-83. ]
[30]	刘靖, 张车伟, 毛学峰. 中国1991—2006年收入分布的动态变化: 基于核密度函数的分解分析[J]. 世界经济, 2009(10):3-13.
	[ Liu Jing, Zhang Chewei, Mao Xuefeng. Dynamic changes of the income distribution in China: Based on the kernel density estimation. The Journal of World Economy, 2009(10):3-13. ]
[31]	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.
	[ Zhou Li'an, Chen Ye. The policy effect of tax and fees reforms in rural China: A difference-in-differences estimation. Economic Research Journal, 2005(8):44-53. ]

指标	海拔高度(5 km缓冲)		海拔高度(10 km缓冲)
指标	原行政中心	现行政中心	原行政中心	现行政中心
平均	411.7	398.5	436.8	423.6
标准误差	31.3	30.4	32.5	31.5
中位数	87.3	86.8	93.4	92.5
标准差	748.8	727.3	775.9	752.4
最小值	0.5	0.5	-0.6	-0.6
最大值	4729.4	4711.9	4751.6	4744.3
总和	235092.9	227559.8	249391.2	241860.9
观测数	571	571	571	571

变量	全样本	分规模(人口)				分区域
变量	全样本	50万以下	50万~100万	100万~500万	500万以上	东部	中部	西部	东北
Treated	0.006 (0.34)	-0.014 (-0.43)	0.044^* (1.82)	0.033 (1.09)	-0.128 (-1.10)	0.053^* (1.69)	-0.009 (-0.37)	-0.016 (-0.37)	0.011 (0.36)
ln urban	-0.005 (-0.39)	0.030 (1.58)	0.002 (0.11)	-0.027 (-0.71)	-0.050 (-0.39)	-0.046^** (-2.12)	0.022 (1.28)	0.013 (0.50)	-0.066 (-1.43)
ln indus	1.075^*** (9.13)	0.761^*** (3.97)	0.952^*** (7.02)	1.247^** (2.00)	6.232^* (2.33)	1.943^*** (9.99)	0.782^*** (3.84)	0.531^* (1.89)	0.968^*** (5.33)
ln czzc	0.083^*** (5.58)	0.081^** (2.48)	0.082^*** (4.44)	0.062^*** (3.61)	0.052 (0.78)	0.067^*** (5.79)	0.130^*** (3.82)	0.095^** (2.04)	0.034^* (1.90)
ln inv	0.092^*** (10.94)	0.081^*** (5.68)	0.079^*** (7.13)	0.132^*** (7.68)	0.272^** (2.81)	0.089^*** (5.24)	0.074^*** (5.36)	0.053^*** (2.81)	0.085^*** (3.69)
ln wstz	0.021^*** (5.70)	0.012^** (2.48)	0.025^*** (3.92)	0.028^*** (3.06)	-0.041 (-0.99)	0.032^*** (4.47)	0.007 (0.97)	0.014^* (1.89)	0.022^** (2.64)
ln pden	0.010 (0.51)	0.012 (0.66)	-0.001 (-0.01)	0.022 (0.34)	-0.088 (-0.88)	-0.034 (-1.21)	0.086^* (1.92)	-0.010 (-0.54)	0.008 (0.19)
常数	1.820^*** (3.37)	3.278^*** (4.16)	2.521^*** (4.09)	0.826 (0.30)	-22.603^* (-1.94)	-1.299 (-1.53)	2.236^* (1.96)	4.452^*** (3.56)	3.003^*** (3.26)
时间效应固定	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是
个体效应固定	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是	是
N	5352	1831	1998	1356	167	1529	1834	1289	700
R²	0.964	0.966	0.975	0.961	0.934	0.962	0.977	0.964	0.972

Characteristics, effects, and influencing factors of the relocation of administrative centers at or above the county level in China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 31

Related Articles 2

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	KUANG Zhensheng, SUN Bindong. Reexamining the explanation of China’s spatial transformation from the perspective of new state space framework [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2021, 40(3): 511-523.
[2]	ZHU Jianhua, WANG Kaiyong, CHEN Tian. Progress and prospects of city-type administrative region setting-up in China and abroad [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2015, 34(8): 987-997.