Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Industrialization of Rural China$

Chris Bramall

Print publication date: 2006

Print ISBN-13: 9780199275939

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2007

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199275939.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: null; date: 24 February 2017

(p.340) APPENDIX 2 Estimation of Industrial GVA in Sichuan

(p.340) APPENDIX 2 Estimation of Industrial GVA in Sichuan

The Industrialization of Rural China
Oxford University Press

A2.1. Estimating the Growth of Industrial Gross Value-Added by County

The procedure used to estimate industrial value-added was to start with the published data on GVIO. Complete county sets are available for 1978, 1980, 1985–88, 1989 and 1991–2002. Missing years were estimated by linear interpolation. The data are relatively consistent and, although there are some sharp year-on-year fluctuations, these are smoothed out in calculating the growth rate. The most suspect time series seems to be that for Guangyuan prefecture in the late 1990s; it appears that the output of many state-owned enterprises has been omitted from the data. For this reason (as discussed in Chapter 9), I have omitted Guangyuan from some of the regression calculations. I have also omitted Suining from the analysis because industrial production there seems to fall for no good reason in the mid-1990s. Most fundamentally (and discussed in Chapter 9), many of the industrial output data for rural Chongqing municipality (comprising Chongqing proper as well as the prefectures of Wanxian and Fuling), whether in SCZL (1990) or in CQTJNJ (1989), are inconsistent and too unreliable to include in most of the analysis.

The industry definition used includes all types of industry, including village-level and below. Note that the county-level data published in the 1985 Industrial Census for 1980 and 1985 volumes are not comprehensive because they exclude many small-scale enterprises. In those instances where data on the output of village-level industry is unavailable for 1978 and 1980 (48 counties are involved), the provincial growth rate was applied to 1985 village output levels to estimate it.

Value-added data for industry are available for 2000–02. For 1978–85, I have used the ratio of GVIO to GVA for independent-accounting enterprises given for each county in SCZL (1990) in 1985. Although value-added ratios are given for 1978 and 1980, these ratios are implausible for many of the counties, especially in western Sichuan. The 1985 value-added ratios are more reliable because they were estimated during the 1985 Industrial Census. For 1986–89, I have used the ratio of GVIO to GVA for independent-accounting enterprises for each county given in SCZL (1990) for each year. GVA for 1989–99 is estimated as a weighted average of county value-added ratios in 1988 and in 2000; the weighting for the early 1990s is dominated by the value-added ratio of 1988, and vice versa.

Value-added data are all expressed at 1990 prices. The data for the 1980s are given in 1980 constant prices, and the provincial industry deflator was used to convert these to 1990 constant prices. The provincial deflator was also used to convert current to constant 1990 price data for the data for each county for all subsequent years.

(p.341) Per capita industrial output growth was estimated by calculating population growth rates between the endpoints of 1982 and 1997, and 1982 and 2002. The use of per capita data helps to eliminate the more pernicious boundary changes. The data for 1982 used in the regressions, the grain yield figures for 1987, and the distance of counties from Chengdu and Chongqing, were taken from the sources discussed in Chapter 7.

A2.2. The Reliability and Coverage of the Sichuan County Data

The apparent under-development of the rural hinterland of Chengdu in the late 1970s does not appear to be an artefact resulting from the exclusion of industrial enterprises owned by central ministries or by the provincial government. It is evident from a comparison between the data in SCZL (1990)—the main source for the industrial data for the early 1980s—and the data in some of the xian zhi, that the SCZL data include all types of industrial enterprises. See for example Chongqing XZ (1991: 417), Shifang XZ (1988:13–41) or Dianjiang XZ (1993: 304, 426) and compare with the SCZL (1990) data. It is true that, if we sum xian and qu GVIO for Chengdu prefecture, the aggregate of the parts is far less than the prefectural whole. In 1978, for example, GVIO for Chengdu (counties and qu) is 1283 million yuan by aggregation, but given separately as 4,531 million yuan (SCZL 1990: 337, 399–415). However, this difference reflects not omissions from the county totals, but a vast understatement of GVIO in Chengdu city proper. In 1984, for example, GVIO in Chengdu city proper was 6,664 million yuan (TJNJ 1985: 93), whereas the SCZL (1990) figure for the city proper obtained by aggregating output in the various qu comes to only 1,093 million yuan for 1985. In the 1990s and after, the development of special economic zones of one form or another has added to the problem. These are usually administered directly by the municipality and their output omitted from data for the districts. Again, however, this is a distortion to the level of output in Chengdu city proper, rather than the outlying counties which are our focus. Nor can the under-development of rural Chengdu be explained in terms of defence-related anomalies. The Chongqing area was a key centre of weapons production, but the same is not true of Chengdu prefecture. Accordingly, it seems reasonable to accept the data on rural industrialization in the Chengdu region for the late 1980s at face value.