中国规模生猪养殖的绿色技术进步偏向

近年来中国生猪养殖面临粮食价格驱动的饲料成本上升、劳动力成本上升以及规模化经营趋势下粪污处理等现实挑战。中国生猪产业能否克服上述问题,实现可持续发展呢?理论上,有偏技术进步在优化资源配置、提升生猪养殖效率、促进规模生产和污染减排方面大有可观。本文基于2007—2017年中国小、中、大3种规模生猪养殖成本收益数据,计算考虑5种非合意产出的生猪养殖的投入偏向型技术进步指数;针对各区域生猪养殖可持续发展面临的现实问题和环境规制目标,划分多个中观地理单元;在此基础上,探讨技术进步所倚重的要素是否与区域资源禀赋相协调,进一步为各区域诱致生猪养殖技术进步方向和优化规模生产路径提供支持性证据。研究结果表明, 1)不同规模生猪养殖均存在投入偏向型技术进步,且偏向型技术进步能够在中性技术进步的基础上促进绿色全要素生产率的提高; 2)小、中、大3种规模生猪养殖的绿色技术进步的要素投入偏向呈现节约劳动力而使用精饲料趋势; 3)大规模生猪养殖技术进步偏向性最高,对生猪养殖的绿色全要素生产率增长所发挥的正面作用最强。本文认为生猪养殖技术进步要素偏向主要由区域资源禀赋所决定,各区域应当基于其资源禀赋和环境规制目标诱致技术变迁。

Biased green technology progress in China's scale pig breeding

Operation scales are an important aspect of modern livestock and poultry breeding programs in China. However, intensive breeding scales often increase the contradiction between pig breeding scale and eco-environmental factors. Thus, the future development of China''s pig breeding industry depends on boosting the scale of operations and curbing the associated environmental pollution. Technological progress, especially green-biased technology, is highly beneficial and optimizes resource allocation, improves pig breeding efficiency, promotes scaled production, and abates pollution. Therefore, it is important to broaden our understanding of the green-biased technological progress in scale of pig breeding operations. This study used data from China''s small-, medium-and large-scale pig breeding operations from 2007 to 2017 and systematically calculated the emission of five pollutants generated during the breeding process, which were included as undesirable outputs in the green total factor productivity (GTFP) accounting system. This study also aimed to increase the following marginal contributions to academic discussion. First, the GTFP and the biased technology progress were combined, and not only was the green-biased technological progress in the scale of pig breeding operations in China identified but also the input-oriented green technological progress index was calculated. Second, the input bias of green technology progress was discussed considering the labor force and the concentrated feed input, which affected the long-term survivability and profitability of the pig breeding scale. Third, this study divided the Mainland of China into several meso-geographical units (i.e., key development areas, restricted development areas, potential development areas, and moderate development areas) and discussed whether the green technology progress bias was in harmony with the regional factor endowments. We also presented supporting evidence for the direction of the technological progressions in each area. This paper documented an input-oriented technology progress bias in various scales of pig breeding operations across different areas, and notably, the biases in all areas did not lead to lower GTFP. However, GTFP improvement may stem from a bias for neutral technology progress. The uptrend of technology progress bias in large-scale pig breeding was significant; i.e., the positive effects of technology progress bias on GTFP in pig breeding were increasing. The green technology progress bias for small-, medium-and large-scale pig breeding saved labor by substitutive adoption of concentrated feed. The information presented here indicated that the regional resource endowments determined the biases of technological progress factors in the scale of pig breeding operations in China. Thus, each region should adopt changes in technology based on its resource endowment and environmental regulation objectives.