“一带一路”沿线国家开放度时空格局及其影响因素

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2020.05.21

干旱区地理 ›› 2020, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (5): 1358-1370.doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2020.05.21

“一带一路”沿线国家开放度时空格局及其影响因素

马卫 ^{1，2，3，4}，黄晓燕 ^2，3，4，曹小曙^2，3，4

1 陕西师范大学地理科学与旅游学院，陕西西安 710119；2 陕西师范大学自然资源与国土空间研究院，陕西西安 710119；3 陕西师范大学西北城镇化与国土环境空间模拟重点实验室，陕西西安 710119； 4 陕西师范大学全球区域与城市研究院，陕西西安 710119

收稿日期:2019-10-12 修回日期:2020-04-22 出版日期:2020-09-25 发布日期:2020-09-25
通讯作者: 曹小曙（1970-），男，甘肃灵台人，博士，教授，博士生导师，研究方向为地理与规划.
作者简介:马卫（1988-），男，江苏泰州人，博士研究生，研究方向为交通地理与区域发展.E-mail:mawei15194@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金重点项目（41831284）

Spatio-temporal pattern of openness of countries along the Belt and Road Initiative and its influencing factors

MA We^{i1, 2, 3, 4}, HUANG Xiao-yan^{2, 3, 4}, CAO Xiao-shu^{2, 3, 4}

1 School of Geography and Tourism, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, Shaanxi, China; 2 Academy of Natural Resources and Territorial Space, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, Shaanxi, China; 3 Key Laboratory for Urbanization and Land Environment Geosimulation in Northwest China, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, Shaanxi, China; 4 Institute of Global Regional and Urban Studies, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, Shaanxi, China

Received:2019-10-12 Revised:2020-04-22 Online:2020-09-25 Published:2020-09-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： “一带一路”开启了中国对外开放新格局，并对沿线国家及全世界的共同发展和繁荣会产生重大影响。基于 2000—2015 年“一带一路”沿线 66 个国家的面板数据，构建开放度综合评价指标体系，采用核密度估计、标准差椭圆、探索性空间数据分析及动态空间杜宾模型，分析了“一带一路”沿线国家开放度时空格局及其影响因素。结果发现：（1）2000—2015 年“一带一路”沿线开放度水平总体呈上升趋势，且差异逐渐缩小。（2）开放度的重心在移动方位上分为两个阶段：2000— 2008 年重心向西北方向移动，而 2008 年之后重心逐渐向偏东方向移动。（3）开放度存在明显的空间差异，西北部开放度较高，而中部和南部开放度相对较低。（4）开放度在全局上存在显著的空间自相关性。热点区集中于新加坡和塞浦路斯 2 国，冷点区主要集中在中国、中亚和南亚。（5）动态空间杜宾模型（DSDM）分析表明，经济发展水平、人力资本、陆路交通和港口对开放度均存在长短期效应以及直接、间接效应。

关键词: 开放度, 时空格局, 动态空间杜宾模型, “一带一路”

Abstract: The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has marked a new pattern for China’s all-round opening-up, and it will have significant impacts on the common development and prosperity of countries along the BRI. Based on the panel data of 66 countries from 2000 to 2015, this paper develops a comprehensive evaluation index system of openness in order to examine its spatio-temporal pattern of openness and influencing factors, which integrated the approaches of Kernel Density Estimation (KDE), Standard Deviation Ellipse (SDE), Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis (ESDA) and Dynamic Spatial Durbin Model (DSDM). The empirical results show: (1) Openness presents a rising trend year by year, and the difference gradually narrows. (2) The center of gravity of openness is divided into two stages in moving direction: from 2000 to 2008, the center of gravity moves to the northwest, while after 2008, the center of gravity gradually moves to the east. (3) There were obvious spatial differences in openness, with the northwest regions having a high degree of openness than the central and southern regions relatively. (4) In global agglomeration, openness had a positive spatial autocorrelation. In local agglomeration, hot spots were concentrated in Singapore and Cyprus, while cold spots were mainly in China, Central Asia and South Asia. (5) DSDM analysis shows that level of economic development, human capital, land transport and port had strong positive direct effects and indirect effects on openness, both in short-term and long-term.

Key words: openness, spatio-temporal pattern, DSDM, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)

马卫, 黄晓燕, 曹小曙. “一带一路”沿线国家开放度时空格局及其影响因素[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(5): 1358-1370.

MA Wei, HUANG Xiao-yan, CAO Xiao-shu. Spatio-temporal pattern of openness of countries along the Belt and Road Initiative and its influencing factors[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(5): 1358-1370.

参考文献 43

[1]	刘卫东.“一带一路”战略的科学内涵与科学问题[J]. 地理科学进展, 2015, 34(5): 538-544. [LIU Weidong. Scientific understand⁃ ing of the Belt and Road Initiative of China and related research themes[J]. Progress in Geography, 2015, 34(5): 538-544. ]
[2]	HABOVA A. Silk Road economic belt: China’s Marshall plan, piv⁃ ot to Eurasia or China’s way of foreign policy[J]. KSI Transactions on Knowledge Society, 2015, 8(1): 64-70.
[3]	PENNA M. China’s Marshall plan: All Silk Roads lead to Beijing? [J]. World Politics Review, December 9, 2014.
[4]	ROLAND N. China’s“Belt and Road Initiative”: Underwhelming or game-change?[J]. The Washington Quarterly, 2017, 40(1): 127- 142.
[5]	金玲.“一带一路”: 中国的马歇尔计划？[J]. 国际问题研究, 2015, (1): 88-99. [JIN Ling. The Belt and Road Initiative: China’s Marshall plan?[J]. International Studies, 2015,(1): 88-99.]
[6]	BROWN W A. The international gold standard reinterpreted, 1914-1934[M]. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1940.
[7]	ROMER P M. Increasing returns and long- run growth[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1986, 94(5): 1002-1037.
[8]	EDWARDS S. Openness, productivity and growth: what do we real⁃ ly know?[J]. The Economic Journal, 1998, 108(447): 383-398.
[9]	CHANG R, KALTANI L, LOAYZA N V. Openness can be good for growth: The role of policy complementarities[J]. Journal of De⁃ velopment Economics, 2009, 90(1): 33-49.
[10]	HUCHET-BOURDON M, MOUEL C L, VIJIL M. The relationship between trade openness and economic growth: Some new insights on the openness measurement[J]. The World Economy, 2017, 39 (4): 1-27.
[11]	WINTERS L A, S A. Openness and growth: still an open question?[J]. Journal of International Development, 2013, 25(8): 1061-1070.
[12]	SACHS J D, WARNER A, ASLUND A, et al. Economic reform and the process of global integration[J]. Brookings papers on eco⁃ nomic activity, 1995, 35(1): 1-118.
[13]	KOTCHERLAKOTA V, SACK-RITTENHOUSE M. Index of open⁃ ness: measurement and analysis[J]. The Social Science Journal, 2000, 37(1): 125-130.
[14]	YANIKKAYA H. Trade openness and economic growth: a cross- country empirical investigation[J]. Journal of Development eco⁃ nomics, 2003, 72(1): 57-89.
[15]	QUINN D P, INCLAN C. The origins of financial openness: a study of current and capital account liberalization[J]. American Journal of Political Science, 1997, 41(3): 771-813.
[16]	BALTAGI B H, DEMETRIADES P O, LAW S H. Financial devel⁃ opment and openness: Evidence from panel data[J]. Journal of de⁃ velopment economics, 2009, 89(2): 285-296.
[17]	QUINN D, SCHINDLER M, TOYODA A M. Assessing measures of financial openness and integration[J]. IMF Economic Review, 2011, 59(3): 488-522.
[18]	熊彬, 刘泽宇. 制度质量视角下“一带一路”沿线国家金融开放度空间差异和收敛性研究[J]. 世界经济研究, 2009,(5): 3-13. [ XIONG Bin, LIU Zeyu. Study on the spatial difference and conver⁃ gence of financial openness of countries along the “Belt and Road”from the perspective of institutional quality[J]. World Econ⁃ omy Studies, 2009,(5): 3-13.]
[19]	陈晓, 宋衡. 丝绸之路经济带核心区乌鲁木齐区域金融中心建设水平及影响因素的实证研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2018, 41(1): 215-220. [ CHEN Xiao, SONG Heng. Factors of construction lev⁃ el and influence of Urumqi Regional Financial Center in the core area of Silk Road Economic Belt[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2018, 41(1): 215-220. ]
[20]	殷杰, 刘雅芳, 杨东旭, 等.“一带一路”沿线欧洲诸国旅游开放度研究[J]. 经济地理, 2017, 37(6): 190-197. [ YIN Jie, LIU Ya⁃ fang, YANG Dongxu, et al. Study on tourism openness of Europe⁃ an countries along the“B&R”[J]. Economic Geography, 2017, 37 (6): 190-197. ]
[21]	张永年, 潘竟虎. 中国地级及以上城市对外开放度时空分异格局[J]. 干旱区地理, 2018, 41(5): 1123-1131. [ ZHANG Yongnian, PAN Jinghu. Spatio- temporal pattern of economic opening rate at prefecture level cities or above in China[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2018, 41(5): 1123-1131. ]
[22]	杨朝均, 杨文珂, 李宁. 中国区域对外开放度的差异分解及空间收敛性研究[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2018, 30(1): 115-125. [YANG Chaojun, YANG Wenke, LI Ning. Study on difference decomposi⁃ tion and spatial convergence of regional openness in China[J]. R&D Management, 2018, 30(1): 115-125. ]
[23]	ESTRADA M A R. The global dimension of the regional integra⁃ tion model(GDRI-Model)[J]. Modern Economy, 2013, 4: 346-369.
[24]	赵娟, 石培基, 朱国锋. 西部地区对外开放度的测算与比较研究 [J]. 世界地理研究, 2016, 25(4): 93-101. [ ZHAO Juan, SHI Pei⁃ ji, ZHU Guofeng. Measurement and comparative study of the west⁃ ern region of openness[J]. World Regional Studies, 2016, 25(4): 93-101.]
[25]	BABENKO V, PEREVOZOVA I, MANDYCH O, et al. World in⁃ formation in conditions of international globalization: Factors of in⁃ fluence[J]. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Manage⁃ ment, 2019, 5: 172-179.
[26]	MUTASCU M. A time- frequency analysis of trade openness and CO2 emissions in France[J]. Energy Policy, 2018, 115: 443-455.
[27]	李锴, 齐绍洲. 贸易开放、经济增长与中国二氧化碳排放[J]. 经济研究, 2011, (11): 60- 72 + 102. [ LI Kai, QI Shaozhou. Trade openness, economic growth and carbon dioxide emission in China [J]. Economic Research, 2011, (11): 60-72+102. ]
[28]	DONG F. The impact of economic openness on standard of living and income inequality in eight countries[J]. Emerging Markets Re⁃ view, 2014, 21: 234-264.
[29]	魏浩, 耿园. 对外贸易与中国的城乡收入差距[J]. 世界经济研究, 2015, (7): 89-99. [ WEI Hao, GENG Yuan. International trade and urban-rural income gap in China[J]. World Economy Studies, 2015, (7): 89-99. ]
[30]	陈升, 潘虹. 中国省域开放度的影响因素实证研究——基于 1998-2012 年省际面板数据的分析[J]. 经济问题探索, 2015, (6): 1-9. [ CHEN Sheng, PAN Hong. Empirical study on influenc⁃ ing factors of provincial openness in China based on the analysis of provincial panel data from 1998 to 2012[J]. Inquiry into Eco⁃ nomic issues, 2015, (6): 1-9. ]
[31]	李建新, 钟业喜, 黄洁, 等. 21 世纪以来京汕低谷带经济发展差异研究[J]. 经济地理, 2015, 35(8): 10-18. [ LI Jianxin，ZHONG Yexi, HUANG Jie, et al. Economic development disparities of Jing-Shan Economic Trough Belt since 2000[J]. Economic Geogra⁃ phy, 2015, 35(8): 10-18. ]
[32]	刘世薇, 张平宇, 宋凤斌, 等. 黑龙江垦区农业现代化水平评价 [J]. 地理科学, 2018, 38(7): 1051- 1060. [ LIU Shiwei, ZHANG Pingyu, SONG Fengbin, et al. Measuring the agricultural modern⁃ ization level of Heilongjiang reclamation areas in China[J]. Scien⁃ tia Geographica Sinica, 2018, 38(7): 1051-1060. ]
[33]	鲍超, 邹建军. 中国西北地区城镇化质量的时空变化分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2019, 42(5): 1141- 1152. [ BAO Chao，ZOU Jianjun. Spatiotemporal variations of urbanization quality in northwest Chi⁃ na[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2019, 42(5): 1141-1152. ]
[34]	李哲, 申玉铭, 曾春水. 中国省域科技创新模式及其时空演变 [J]. 地理研究, 2018, 37(6): 1223-1237. [ LI Zhe，SHEN Yuming, ZENG Chunshui. Science and technology innovation patterns and their spatial and temporal evolution of provinces in China[J]. Geo⁃ graphical Research, 2018, 37(6): 1223-1237. ]
[35]	LU Huiling, ZHOU Lihua, CHEN Yong, et al. Degree of coupling and coordination of eco-economic system and the influencing fac⁃ tors: a case study in Yanchi County, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Re⁃ gion, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2017, 9(3): 446-457.
[36]	TSEKERIS T. Domestic transport effects on regional export trade in Greece[J]. Research in Transportation Economics, 2017, 61: 2-14.
[37]	DEBARSY N, ERTUR C, LESAGE J P. Interpreting dynamic space-time panel data models[J]. Statistical Methodology, 2012, 9 (1-2): 158-171.
[38]	CHEN W Y, HU F Z Y, LI X, et al. Strategic interaction in munici⁃ pal governments’provision of public green spaces: A dynamic spatial panel data analysis in transitional China[J]. Cities, 2017, 71: 1-10.
[39]	江海旭, 李悦铮, 李鑫. 长山群岛与塞浦路斯休闲旅游业合作探讨[J]. 世界地理研究, 2010, 19(1): 130-137. [ JIANG Haixu, LI Yuezheng, LI Xin. A discussion on cooperation of leisure tourism industry between Changshan islands and Cyprus[J]. World Region⁃ al Studies, 2010, 19(1): 130-137. ]
[40]	NOORBAKHSH F, PALONI A, YOUSSEF A. Human capital and FDI inflows to developing countries: New empirical evidence[J]. World Development, 2001, 29(9): 1593-1610.
[41]	张晓磊, 张二震.“一带一路”沿线恐怖活动风险的贸易隔离效应[J]. 世界经济文汇, 2017, (1): 69-86. [ ZHANG Xiaolei, ZHANG Erzhen. The trade isolation effect of the Belt and Road Initiative terror⁃ ist activity risk[J]. World Economic Papers, 2017, (1): 69-86. ]
[42]	BAIER S L, BERGSTRAND J H. The growth of world trade: tariff, transport cost，and income similarity[J]. Journal of International Economics, 2001, 53(1): 1-27.
[43]	范幸丽. 构建“一带一路”区域民航合作新模式[J]. 综合运输, 2017, 39(1): 1-4. [ FAN Xingli. Setting up the new pattern of re⁃ gional civil aviation cooperation for China and the Belt and Road Initiatives countries[J]. China Transportation Review, 2017, 39(1): 1-4. ]

“一带一路”沿线国家开放度时空格局及其影响因素

Spatio-temporal pattern of openness of countries along the Belt and Road Initiative and its influencing factors

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献 43

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	高福鑫, 赵玲, 魏琼. 乡村非农就业水平的时空格局及动态演进——以青海省为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(12): 2111-2119.
[2]	雷振仙, 王坤, 赵松欣. “一带一路”沿线国家交通基础设施对入境旅游的空间效应研究——基于多重距离权重的考察[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(11): 1915-1926.
[3]	杨丽,付玉慧,王姣姣. “一带一路”沿线中国省份旅游信息流时空分布格局及驱动因素分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(10): 1714-1722.
[4]	肖懿晨, 文军, 李玲玉, 冯庆旺. 中国与“一带一路”沿线国家空间联通水平差异与成因分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(10): 1723-1731.
[5]	余玉洋,李晶,周自翔,唐承延. 基于贝叶斯网络的生态系统服务空间格局优化——以泾河流域为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(4): 1268-1280.
[6]	姚旭阳,张明军,张宇,王家鑫,肖涵余. 中国西北地区气候转型的新认识[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(3): 671-683.
[7]	李雨欣,薛东前,马蓓蓓,董朝阳. 黄土高原地区农村贫困空间演化及偏远特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(2): 534-543.
[8]	程浩然,蒙吉军,朱利凯. 基于多源地理数据融合的黑河中游土地多功能性时空格局与权衡研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(1): 208-220.
[9]	杨晴青, 高岩辉, 杨新军, 吴孔森 . 黄土高原半干旱区微尺度乡村人居环境系统脆弱性测度及时空分异 ——以陕西省佳县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(5): 1371-1381.
[10]	刘清, 杨永春, 刘海洋. 中国366个城市空气污染综合程度的时空演变特征分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(3): 820-830.
[11]	童志辉, 熊助国, 孙睿, 刘向铜, 王东东. 利用多源数据估算黑河流域总初级生产力 [J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(2): 440-448.
[12]	孙天瑶, 李雪梅, 许民, 张萌生. 2000—2018年塔里木河流域植被覆盖时空格局 [J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(2): 415-424.
[13]	陈曦, 常存, 包安明, 吴世新, 罗格平. 改革开放40 a来新疆土地覆被变化的空间格局与特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(1): 1-11.
[14]	钟佳利, 杨德刚, 霍金炜. 乌昌地区基本公共服务失配度时空格局演化及影响因素分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2019, 42(5): 1205-1212.
[15]	王彦霞, 王培安. 新型城镇化视角下县域城镇化时空格局及聚集特征——以浙江省为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2019, 42(2): 423-432.