Industrial Policy Implementation: Empirical Evidence from China’s Shipbuilding Industry
Review of Economic Studies · 2025 · [{"name": "Panle Jia Barwick", "affiliation": ["Center for Economic and Policy Research", "University of Wisconsin–Madison"]}, {"name": "Myrto Kalouptsidi", "affiliation": ["Center for Economic and Policy Research", "Harvard University"]}, {"name": "Nahim Bin Zahur", "affiliation": ["Queen's University"]}]
中文摘要
摘要 产业政策在世界范围内被广泛使用。在实践中，设计和实施这些政策是一项复杂的任务。本文评估不同产业政策工具的长期绩效，这些工具包括生产补贴、投资补贴、进入补贴和整合政策。为此，我们考察了中国近期一项旨在推动本国造船业成为全球最大的产业政策。利用1998年至2014年的企业层面数据以及一个刻画企业进入、退出、投资与生产的动态模型，我们发现：(i) 该政策大幅提升了中国的国内投资、企业进入和国际市场份额，但回报较低，并导致产业碎片化、产能闲置以及世界船价被压低；(ii) 不同政策工具的有效性表现不一：从市场份额的考量出发，生产补贴和投资补贴具有合理性，而进入补贴则是浪费的；(iii) 逆周期政策、针对特定企业的定向支持以及缩短干预期限，能够显著减少扭曲。我们的结果凸显了企业异质性、经济周期与企业成本结构在政策设计中的关键作用。最后，在探讨潜在的政策理据时，我们发现了对非经典考量的支持性证据，例如通过降低运费来促进中国贸易。
Abstract
Abstract Industrial policies are widely used across the world. In practice, designing and implementing these policies is a complicated task. In this paper, we assess the long-term performance of different industrial policy instruments, which include production subsidies, investment subsidies, entry subsidies, and consolidation policies. To do so, we examine a recent industrial policy in China aiming to propel the country’s shipbuilding industry to the largest globally. Using firm-level data from 1998 to 2014 and a dynamic model of firm entry, exit, investment, and production, we find that (i) the policy boosted China’s domestic investment, entry, and international market share dramatically, but delivered low returns and led to fragmentation, idle capacity, as well as depressed world ship prices; (ii) the effectiveness of different policy instruments is mixed: production and investment subsidies can be justified by market share considerations, while entry subsidies are wasteful; (iii) counter-cyclical policies, firm-targeting, and shortening the intervention horizon can substantially reduce distortions. Our results highlight the critical role of firm heterogeneity, business cycles, and firms’ cost structure in policy design. Finally, when exploring potential rationales, we find support for nonclassical considerations, such as reducing freight rates to boost Chinese trade.