西方学者较早关注到，由市场主导的工业产业集聚不仅实现了生产率的提高，同时在集聚的外部规模经济作用（外部性）下通过技术溢出进步、治污的规模效应等降低了单位产出污染排放，提高了环境效率，这一结论在许多工业集群地区得到验证。国内的许多学者也考察过中国的工业集聚与环境效率的关系，但得到的结论不一。认为中国的工业集聚外部规模经济作用没有明显改善环境效率的研究从集聚的产业链不够完整、布局不尽合理等原因进行了一定程度的解释，但是一个更深层次的原因却往往被忽略：政府因素。现有研究大多是基于市场主导工业集聚形成的假设前提，认为企业在要素回报率引导下自发集聚形成外部规模经济效应进而影响环境效率。但是在中国，工业集聚并不完全由市场主导形成，地方政府为发展经济通过地价干预手段影响工业集聚是非常普遍的现象。地价是企业进入地区的门槛，而政府对地价的干预使企业进入门槛降低并变相形成对企业的政策补贴，表面上这会推动和加快工业集聚规模的形成，但是集聚企业的内部关联性和生产行为也可能会发生改变进而影响集聚外部规模经济作用（外部性）的发挥。因此，本文想要验证的问题是：政府的地价干预会影响工业集聚的外部性发挥对环境效率的改善作用吗？具体的影响机制是什么呢？回答上述问题，有助于深入了解目前地方政府普遍实行的地价政策干预行为在地区产业发展对环境的影响中起到怎样的作用，具有一定现实意义和政策参考价值。

基于上述提出的问题，本文首先根据已有文献研究，归纳总结关于工业集聚对环境效率影响的机制和结论，然后从地方政府干预的视角入手，以工业地价偏离来刻画政府的干预行为，将其纳入工业集聚与环境效率关系的分析框架，重点阐述地价干预影响工业集聚对环境效率作用的理论机制。其次，基于2007-2013年全国245个地级市的面板数据，采用动态面板模型检验政府地价干预是否影响了工业集聚外部规模经济效应对环境效率的作用，并进行稳健性检验。同时在考虑地区行业发展异质性和环保政策执行时点差异的基础上进一步检验地价干预的调节作用是否存在差异性。最后根据所得到的实证研究结果，提出相应的政策意见。

本文共分为六个章节。第一章为绪论，首先介绍本文的研究背景，并结合实际观察和已有文献的不足提出本文的研究问题。本文认为现有文献对中国工业集聚与环境效率关系的研究大多遗漏了政府的因素，但是在现实中政府对工业集聚的干预行为普遍存在，这可能会影响集聚对环境效率的作用，如果忽视这一重要因素在理论模型中的作用可能会产生遗漏重要变量的问题。因此，本文尝试从政府干预的视角切入，探析政府地价干预行为是否会影响工业集聚对环境效率的作用。此外，本章节还对研究的目的与意义、具体研究内容、研究方法、技术路线以及可能的创新点与不足之处进行了阐述。

第二章为概念界定与文献综述部分。针对本文的研究内容，本章节首先对政府地价干预、工业集聚和地区环境效率进行了概念上的界定。然后，从政府干预工业地价的相关研究、工业集聚形成的原因、环境效率的影响因素、工业集聚对环境效率的影响以及政府干预对工业集聚与集聚效应影响的研究这五个方面对相关文献进行归纳和总结。

第三章为理论基础与分析框架部分。这一部分主要是通过介绍产业集聚理论、波特的钻石理论以及地价理论，得出本研究所依据的理论基础。然后在理论基础上提出政府地价干预对工业集聚与环境效率关系影响的理论分析框架并阐明作用机制。

第四章为变量计算和现状描述部分。首先测度了本文的核心变量政府地价干预、工业集聚与环境效率，然后根据测算结果进行现状分析。本文发现在2007-2013年的研究时段内，我国工业地价总体负向偏离其边际产出，即工业地价偏低，政府的干预导致地价没有反映土地本身的价值和稀缺性；全国工业集聚度总体呈上升趋势；环境效率变化不均，总体看上升趋势减缓。

第五章为本文的实证研究部分。这一部分通过动态面板模型实证检验政府地价干预是否影响工业集聚与环境效率的关系，并进行了稳健性检验和异质性分析。结果表明，政府和市场共同作用下的工业集聚与环境效率正相关；而在引入政府干预核心因素地价干预与工业集聚的交互项时，地价干预显著抑制了工业集聚对环境效率的改善作用，因此政府地价干预具有显著的负向调节作用。然后在考虑行业异质性的基础上，实证检验发现高端技术行业的地价干预对工业集聚改善环境效率的抑制作用更弱；在考虑环保合约政策实施时点差异的基础上，实证检验发现2011年环保政策文件下达使得环保指标在合约中的作用愈发重要后，政府地价干预对工业集聚改善环境效率的抑制作用较2011年之前相比减弱。

第六章为本文的研究结论与政策建议部分。本节的内容是根据前文的理论分析及实证检验结果总结研究结论，并依据结论提出相关政策建议。首先，应完善工业用地供应的市场机制，减少政府对地价的行政干预，使工业地价逐步回归市场。其次，廓清政府与市场的边界，以更加合理、适度的政府行为与市场力量共同推动产业集聚，充分发挥集聚的正外部性效应。最后，规范地方政府间的竞争机制，重视环保考核在官员政治晋升中的作用，鼓励各地推动经济与环境的协调发展。

Western scholars have long documented that market-led industrial agglomeration not only increases productivity, but also reduces the emissions per unit of output through technological spillover and the scale effect of pollution control. This conclusion has been validated in many industrial cluster areas. However, many domestic scholars who examined the relationship between China's industrial agglomeration and environmental efficiency have reached different conclusions. This literature argues that China's agglomeration scale effect does not improve environmental efficiency due to the incomplete agglomeration industry chain and its unreasonable layout. Nevertheless, a very important external factor was ignored: the government intervention. Most of the existing research is based on the premise of the market-led formation of industry agglomeration, which believes that companies in order to pursue the optimal profits under the guidance of factor costs will spontaneously agglomerate to form external economies of scale and further affect environmental efficiency. However, in China, industrial agglomeration is not entirely dominated by the market, local governments have promoted industrial agglomeration through land price interventions, which is a very common practice. In essence, the government's intervention in landprices on the one hand harms the role of land price as the entry threshold for firms to enter the region, on the other hand, grants subsidies to firms. Therefore, this price intervention not only increases industrial agglomeration scale, but also affecting the internal correlation and production of agglomerated firms, which may affect the external effects of agglomeration. This thesis aims to explore whether the land price intervention impacts the external effects of industrial agglomeration in terms of environmental efficiency? And what is the specific mechanism? Answering the above questions is helpful to understand in depth how the land price policy interventions currently implemented by local governments play a role in formation of agglomeration economies.

Firstly, this thesis summarizes the existing research on the mechanism and the impact of industrial agglomeration on environmental efficiency, and then characterizes the government intervention in terms of industrial land price deviation. Based on this, we establish an analysis framework which clarifies the relationship between agglomeration and environmental efficiency and the mechanism of impact of land price intervention, and then puts forward the propositions. Secondly, based on the panel data of 245 prefecture-level cities in China from 2007 to 2013, a dynamic panel model was used to test whether industrial land price intervention has impacted the effect of agglomeration scale on environmental efficiency, and a robustness test was performed. Moreover, based on the consideration of the heterogeneity inregional industry development, it is further explored whether there is a difference in the role of land price intervention. Finally, according to the empirical results, corresponding policy recommendations are put forward.

This article is divided into six chapters. The first chapter is the introduction. Most of the existing literature on the relationship between industrial agglomeration and environmental efficiency in China has ignored the government factor, but in practice, government intervention in industrial agglomeration is widespread, which may affect the relationship between agglomeration and environmental efficiency. Therefore, this paper aims to explore whether government intervention will affect the relationship between industrial agglomeration and environmental efficiency. In addition, this chapter also describes the purpose and significance of the research, specific research content, research methods, technical routes, and possible innovations and deficiencies.

The second chapter is the conception definition and literature review. In view of the research content of this article, this chapter first defines conceptually the industrial land price intervention, industrial agglomeration, and regional environmental efficiency. Then, the relevant literature is summarized in the three aspects, which are environmental efficiency influencing factors, the impact of industrial agglomeration on environmental efficiency, and the effect of government intervention on the relationship between industrial agglomeration and environmental efficiency.

The third chapter is the theoretical basis and analysis framework. This part mainly introduces the theory basis of this research by introducing the theory of industrial agglomeration, Porter's diamond theory and land price theory. Then the theoretical framework of the effect of government land price intervention on the relationship between industrial agglomeration and environmental efficiency is proposed and the mechanism is clarified.

The fourth chapter is the part of variable calculation and present situation description. It mainly measures the industrial land price intervention, industrial agglomeration, and environmental efficiency variables involved in this article, then analyzes the current status based on the calculation results. This paper finds that during the 2007-2013 research period, the industrial land price is negatively deviated from its marginal output, which implies that government intervention caused the results that the land price is not able to reflect the value and scarcity of the land. In addition, the overall national industrial agglomeration degree increases, while the change the environmental efficiency is not stable.

The fifth chapter is the empirical research of this article. In this part, the effect of industrial land price intervention on the relationship between industrial agglomeration and environmental efficiency is empirically tested through a dynamic panel model, and a robustness test and heterogeneity analysis are performed. The results show that industrial agglomeration is positively related to environmental efficiency when the government intervention factors are not controlled, and when the interactive terms of industrial land price intervention and industrial agglomeration are controlled as core factors of government intervention, land price intervention significantly inhibits the effects of agglomeration external economies of scale on the environment efficiency improvement, so land price intervention has a significant regulatory effect.

The sixth chapter is the research conclusion and policy recommendations of this article. The content of this section is to summarize the research conclusions based on the theoretical analysis and empirical test results mentioned above, and put forward related policy recommendations based on the conclusions. First, the market mechanism for the supply of industrial land should be improved, the government's administrative intervention in land prices should be reduced, and industrial land prices should gradually be determined by the market. Second, the boundary between the government and the market should be clear, and industrial agglomeration should be promoted with more reasonable and appropriate government behavior and market forces, which could give rise to a better agglomeration economy. Finally, the central government should regulate the competition mechanism between local governments and promote the coordinated development of the economy and the environment.

[1] Arellano M, Bover O. Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models[J]. Journal of econometrics, 1995, 68(1): 29-51.

[2] Aschauer D A. Public investment and productivity growth in the Group of Seven[J]. Economic perspectives, 1989, 13(5): 17-25.

[3] Baldwin R E, Forslid R. The core–periphery model and endogenous growth: Stabilizing and destabilizing integration[J]. Economica, 2000, 67(267): 307-324.

[4] Baomin D, Jiong G, Zhao X. FDI and environmental regulation: pollution haven or a race to the top?[J]. Journal of Regulatory economics, 2012, 41(2): 216-237.

[5] Batisse C. Dynamic externalities and local growth: A panel data analysis applied to Chinese provinces[J]. China Economic Review, 2002, 13(2-3): 231-251.

[6] Becker B, Hall S G. Foreign Direct Investment in Industrial R & D and Exchange Rate Uncertainty in the UK[R]. National Institute of Economic and Social Research, 2003.

[7] Blundell R, Bond S. Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models[J]. Journal of econometrics, 1998, 87(1): 115-143.

[8] Brakman S, Garretsen H, Gigengack R, et al. Negative feedbacks in the economy and industrial location[J]. Journal of Regional Science, 1996, 36(4): 631-651.

[9] Brambor T, Clark W R, Golder M. Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses[J]. Political analysis, 2006, 14(1): 63-82.

[10] Cao G, Feng C, Tao R. Local “land finance” in China's urban expansion: challenges and solutions[J]. China & World Economy, 2008, 16(2): 19-30.

[11] Cecile B. Dynamic externalities and local growth: A panel data analysis applied to Chinese provinces[J]. China Economic Review, 2002, 13(2-3): 231-251.

[12] Chen W, Shen Y, Wang Y, et al. How do industrial land price variations affect industrial diffusion? Evidence from a spatial analysis of China[J]. Land use policy, 2018, 71: 384-394.

[13] Chertow M R, Ashton W S, Espinosa J C. Industrial symbiosis in Puerto Rico: Environmentally related agglomeration economies[J]. Regional studies, 2008, 42(10): 1299-1312.

[14] Ciccone A. Agglomeration effects in Europe[J]. European economic review, 2002, 46(2): 213-227.

[15] Copeland B R, Taylor M S. North-South trade and the environment[J]. The quarterly journal of Economics, 1994, 109(3): 755-787.

[16] Copeland B R, Taylor M S. Trade and the Environment[M]. Princeton University Press, 2003: 720-742.

[17] Duranton G, Overman H G. Testing for localization using micro-geographic data[J]. The Review of Economic Studies, 2005, 72(4): 1077-1106.

[18] Duranton G, Puga D. Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies[M]. Elsevier, 2004, 4: 2063-2117.

[19] Ellison G, Glaeser E L, Kerr W R. What causes industry agglomeration? Evidence from coagglomeration patterns[J]. American Economic Review, 2010, 100(3): 1195-1213.

[20] Ellison G, Glaeser E L. Geographic concentration in US manufacturing industries: a dartboard approach[J]. Journal of political economy, 1997, 105(5): 889-927.

[21] Ellison G, Glaeser E L. The geographic concentration of industry: does natural advantage explain agglomeration?[J]. American Economic Review, 1999, 89(2): 311-316.

[22] Fisher-Vanden K, Jefferson G H, Liu H, et al. What is driving China’s decline in energy intensity?[J]. Resource and Energy economics, 2004, 26(1): 77-97.

[23] Frank A．Urban Air Quality in Larger Conurbations in the EuropeanUnion [J]．Environmental Modeling and Software，2001，16 ( 4) :399－414．

[24] Fuji H, Managi S. Which industry is greener?[J]. An empirical study of nine industries in OECD countries, Energy Policy, 2013, 57: 381.

[25] Fujita M. and Thisse J. F.Economics of Agglomeration: Cities，Industrial Location and Regional Growth[M].Cambridge University Press，2002.

[26] Fujita M. Urban economic theory: land use and city size[M]. Cambridge university press, 1989.

[27] Glaeser E L, Kahn M E. Sprawl and urban growth[M]//Handbook of regional and urban economics. Elsevier, 2004, 4: 2481-2527.

[28] Grossman G M, Krueger A B. Economic growth and the environment[J]. The quarterly journal of economics, 1995, 110(2): 353-377.

[29] H, R, Greve. Investment and the behavioral theory of the firm: evidence from shipbuilding[J]. Academy of management journal, 2003, 46(6): 685-702.

[30] Hailu A, Veeman T S. Environmentally sensitive productivity analysis of the Canadian pulp and paper industry, 1959-1994: an input distance function approach[J]. Journal of environmental economics and management, 2000, 40(3): 251-274.

[31] He C. Foreign manufacturing investment in China: The role of industrial agglomeration and industrial linkages[J]. China & world economy, 2008, 16(1): 82-99.

[32] He J. Pollution haven hypothesis and environmental impacts of foreign direct investment: The case of industrial emission of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in Chinese provinces[J]. Ecological economics, 2006, 60(1): 228-245.

[33] Hosoe M, Naito T. Trans‐boundary pollution transmission and regional agglomeration effects[J]. Papers in Regional Science, 2006, 85(1): 99-120.

[34] Jaffe A B, Le T. The impact of R&D subsidy on innovation: a study of New Zealand firms[R]. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2015.

[35] Kawagoe T, Hayami Y, Ruttan V W. The intercountry agricultural production function and productivity differences among countries[J]. Journal of Development economics, 1985, 19(1-2): 113-132.

[36] Keeble D, Nachum L. Why do business service firms cluster? Small consultancies, clustering and decentralization in London and southern England[J]. Transactions of the institute of British geographers, 2002, 27(1): 67-90.

[37] Kerr W R, Kominers S D. Agglomerative forces and cluster shapes[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics, 2015, 97(4): 877-899.

[38] Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography[J]. Journal of political economy, 1991, 99(3): 483-499.

[39] Lau L J, Yotopoulos P A. A test for relative efficiency and application to Indian agriculture[J]. The American Economic Review, 1971, 61(1): 94-109.

[40] Levinson A. Technology, international trade, and pollution from US manufacturing[J]. American Economic Review, 2009, 99(5): 2177-92.

[41] Li Z, Ouyang X, Du K, et al. Does government transparency contribute to improved eco-efficiency performance? An empirical study of 262 cities in China[J]. Energy Policy, 2017, 110: 79-89.

[42] Ludema R D, Wooton I. Economic geography and the fiscal effects of regional integration[J]. Journal of International Economics, 2000, 52(2): 331-357.

[43] Martin P, Ottaviano G I P. Growth and agglomeration[J]. International economic review, 2001, 42(4): 947-968.

[44] Melitz M J. The impact of trade on intra‐industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity[J]. econometrica, 2003, 71(6): 1695-1725.

[45] Newell R G, Jaffe A B, Stavins R N. The induced innovation hypothesis and energy-saving technological change[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1999, 114(3): 941-975.

[46] Okubo T, Picard P M, Thisse J F. The spatial selection of heterogeneous firms[J]. Journal of international economics, 2010, 82(2): 230-237.

[47] Porter M E. The competitive advantage of nations[M]. New York: Mcmillan, 1990.

[48] Rosenthal S S, Strange W C. The determinants of agglomeration[J]. Journal of urban economics, 2001, 50(2): 191-229.

[49] Schaltegger S, Sturm A. ?ologische rationalit?t[J]. Die Unternehmung, 1990, 4: 117-131.

[50] Shao S, Yang L, Yu M, et al. Estimation, characteristics, and determinants of energy-related industrial CO2 emissions in Shanghai (China), 1994–2009[J]. Energy Policy, 2011, 39(10): 6476-6494.

[51] Tao R, Su F, Liu M, et al. Land leasing and local public finance in China’s regional development: Evidence from prefecture-level cities[J]. Urban Studies, 2010, 47(10): 2217-2236.

[52] Tone K. Dealing with undesirable outputs in DEA: A slacks-based measure (SBM) approach[J]. Energy Policy, 2003, 35:6323-6331.

[53] Virkanen J. Effect of urbanization on metal deposition in the bay of Tlnlahti, Southern Finland[J]. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 1998, 36(9): 729-738.

[54] Wagner U J, Timmins C D. Agglomeration effects in foreign direct investment and the pollution haven hypothesis[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2009, 43(2): 231-256.

[55] Wang Q, Wang Y, Chen W, et al. Do land price variation and environmental regulation improve chemical industrial agglomeration? A regional analysis in China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, 94: 104568.

[56] Wang Y, Wang J. Does industrial agglomeration facilitate environmental performance: New evidence from urban China?[J]. Journal of environmental management, 2019, 248: 109244.

[57] WBCSD.Eco-efficiency: Leadership for Improved Economic and Environmental Performance [M].Geneva:WBCSD,1996:3-16.

[58] Wiig Aslesen And H, Isaksen A. Knowledge intensive business services and urban industrial development[J]. The Service Industries Journal, 2007, 27(3): 321-338.

[59] Wu Y, Zhang X, Skitmore M, et al. Industrial land price and its impact on urban growth: A Chinese case study[J]. Land Use Policy, 2014, 36: 199-209.

[60] Xie R, Yao S, Han F, et al. Land Finance, Producer Services Agglomeration, and Green Total Factor Productivity[J]. International Regional Science Review, 2019, 42(5-6): 550-579.

[61] Yamamura E , Shin I . Dynamics of agglomeration economies and regional industrial structure: The case of the assembly industry of the Greater Tokyo Region, 1960–2000[J]. structural change & economic dynamics, 2007, 18(4):0-499.

[62] Yu Y, Zhang Y, Miao X. Impacts of Dynamic Agglomeration Externalities on Eco-Efficiency: Empirical Evidence from China[J]. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018, 15(10): 2304.

[63] Zeng D Z, Zhao L. Pollution havens and industrial agglomeration[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2009, 58(2): 141-153.

[64] 白重恩,杜颖娟,陶志刚,仝月婷.地方保护主义及产业地区集中度的决定因素和变动趋势[J].经济研究,2004(04):29-40.

[65] 曹建海,邓菁.补贴预期、模式选择与创新激励效果——来自战略性新兴产业的经验证据[J].经济管理,2014,36(08):21-30.

[66] 曹建海.论我国土地管理制度与重复建设之关联[J].中国土地,2004(11):12-15.

[67] 曹清峰,王家庭.我国工业用地与居住用地的合理比价估算——基于35个大中城市的实证研究[J].财经科学,2014(09):88-98.

[68] 陈傲.中国区域生态效率评价及影响因素实证分析——以2000-2006年省际数据为例[J].中国管理科学,2008,16(S1):566-570.

[69] 陈坤铭,季彦达,张光南.环保政策对“中国制造”生产效率的影响[J].统计研究,2013,30(09):37-43.

[70] 程中华,刘军.产业集聚、市场潜能与地区工资差距[J].财经论丛,2015(03):10-16.

[71] 仇方道,蒋涛,张纯敏,单勇兵.江苏省污染密集型产业空间转移及影响因素[J].地理科学,2013,33(07):789-796.

[72] 丁建军.产业转移的新经济地理学解释[J].财经科学,2011(01):35-42.

[73] 范寒冰,徐承宇.我国制造业企业政府补贴异质性分析[J].统计与决策,2018,34(20):171-174.

[74] 范剑勇,冯猛,李方文.产业集聚与企业全要素生产率[J].世界经济,2014,37(05):51-73.

[75] 龚新蜀,王曼,张洪振.FDI、市场分割与区域生态效率:直接影响与溢出效应[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(08):95-104.

[76] 郭凯明,杭静,颜色.中国改革开放以来产业结构转型的影响因素[J].经济研究,2017,52(03):32-46.

[77] 韩永辉,黄亮雄,王贤彬.产业结构优化升级改进生态效率了吗?[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2016,33(04):40-59.

[78] 贺灿飞,朱彦刚,朱晟君.产业特性、区域特征与中国制造业省区集聚[J].地理学报,2010,65(10):1218-1228.

[79] 黄建欢,谢优男,余燕团.城市竞争、空间溢出与生态效率:高位压力和低位吸力的影响[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(03):1-12.

[80] 黄健柏,徐震,徐珊.土地价格扭曲、企业属性与过度投资——基于中国工业企业数据和城市地价数据的实证研究[J].中国工业经济,2015(03):57-69.

[81] 黄金升,陈利根,张耀宇,赵爱栋.产业结构差异下地方政府经济行为与工业地价研究[J].产业经济研究,2017(03):81-90.

[82] 黄永兴,徐鹏.经济地理、新经济地理、产业政策与文化产业集聚:基于省级空间面板模型的分析[J].经济经纬,2011(06):47-51.

[83] 江飞涛,曹建海.市场失灵还是体制扭曲——重复建设形成机理研究中的争论、缺陷与新进展[J].中国工业经济,2009(01):53-64.

[84] 江飞涛,耿强,吕大国,李晓萍.地区竞争、体制扭曲与产能过剩的形成机理[J].中国工业经济,2012(06):44-56.

[85] 金培振,张亚斌,彭星.技术进步在二氧化碳减排中的双刃效应——基于中国工业35个行业的经验证据[J].科学学研究,2014,32(05):706-716.

[86] 柯善咨,韩峰.中国城市经济发展潜力的综合测度和统计估计[J].统计研究,2013,30(03):64-71.

[87] 孔凡文.土地价格管理中存在的问题与建议[J].价格理论与实践,1993(11):34-36.

[88] 孔伟杰.制造业企业转型升级影响因素研究——基于浙江省制造业企业大样本问卷调查的实证研究[J].管理世界,2012(09):120-131.

[89] 雷鹏.制造业产业集聚与区域经济增长的实证研究[J].上海经济研究,2011(01):35-45.

[90] 雷潇雨,龚六堂.基于土地出让的工业化与城镇化[J].管理世界,2014(09):29-41.

[91] 李力行,黄佩媛,马光荣.土地资源错配与中国工业企业生产率差异[J].管理世界,2016(08):86-96.

[92] 李楠,于金.政府环保政策对企业技术创新的影响[J].世界科技研究与发展,2016,38(05):932-936+954.

[93] 李平,季永宝.要素价格扭曲是否抑制了我国自主创新?[J].世界经济研究,2014(01):10-15+87.

[94] 李胜兰,初善冰,申晨.地方政府竞争、环境规制与区域生态效率[J].世界经济,2014,37(04):88-110.

[95] 李世杰,胡国柳,高健.转轨期中国的产业集聚演化:理论回顾、研究进展及探索性思考[J].管理世界,2014(04):165-170.

[96] 李晓萍,李平,吕大国,江飞涛.经济集聚、选择效应与企业生产率[J].管理世界,2015(04):25-37+51.

[97] 李扬.西部地区产业集聚水平测度的实证研究[J].南开经济研究,2009(04):144-151.

[98] 林伯强,谭睿鹏.中国经济集聚与绿色经济效率[J].经济研究,2019,54(02):119-132.

[99] 刘卫东,段洲鸿.工业用地价格标准的合理确定[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2008(04):146-153.

[100] 刘修岩.产业集聚与经济增长:一个文献综述[J].产业经济研究,2009(03):70-78.

[101] 刘扬.城市增量工业用地低价出让的政府行为与价格研究[J].经济论坛,2010(01):13-16.

[102] 陆铭,冯皓.集聚与减排:城市规模差距影响工业污染强度的经验研究[J].世界经济,2014,37(07):86-114.

[103] 路江涌,陶志刚.我国制造业区域集聚程度决定因素的研究[J].经济学(季刊),2007(03):801-816.

[104] 马歇尔．经济学原理上卷[M]．商务印书馆，1981.

[105] 迈克尔.波特,竹内广高,神原鞠子.日本还有竞争力吗？[M].陈小悦译.北京:中信出版社，2002.

[106] 毛丰付,裘文龙.纵向分权、横向竞争与土地价格扭曲[J].经济与管理研究,2013(12):35-47.

[107] 潘兴侠,何宜庆,胡晓峰.区域生态效率评价及其空间计量分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2013,22(05):640-647.

[108] 钱学锋,黄玖立,黄云湖.地方政府对集聚租征税了吗?——基于中国地级市企业微观数据的经验研究[J].管理世界,2012(02):19-29+187.

[109] 钱学锋,黄玖立,黄云湖.地方政府对集聚租征税了吗?——基于中国地级市企业微观数据的经验研究[J].管理世界,2012(02):19-29+187.

[110] 邵朝对,苏丹妮,邓宏图.房价、土地财政与城市集聚特征:中国式城市发展之路[J].管理世界,2016(02):19-31+187.

[111] 邵帅,张可,豆建民.经济集聚的节能减排效应:理论与中国经验[J].管理世界,2019,35(01):36-60+226.

[112] 沈能.工业集聚能改善环境效率吗?——基于中国城市数据的空间非线性检验[J].管理工程学报,2014,28(03):57-63+10.

[113] 师博,沈坤荣.政府干预、经济集聚与能源效率[J].管理世界,2013(10):6-18+187.

[114] 史丹,吴利学,傅晓霞,吴滨.中国能源效率地区差异及其成因研究——基于随机前沿生产函数的方差分解[J].管理世界,2008(02):35-43.

[115] 史晋川,赵自芳.所有制约束与要素价格扭曲——基于中国工业行业数据的实证分析[J].统计研究,2007(06):42-47.

[116] 孙传旺,罗源,姚昕.交通基础设施与城市空气污染——来自中国的经验证据[J].经济研究,2019,54(08):136-151.

[117] 孙浦阳,韩帅,许启钦.产业集聚对劳动生产率的动态影响[J].世界经济,2013,36(03):33-53.

[118] 孙钰,王坤岩,姚晓东.城市公共基础设施环境效益研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2015,25(04):92-100.

[119] 谭真勇,谢里,罗能生.地方保护与产业集聚:基于空间经济模型的分析[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版),2009(01):53-58.

[120] 唐杰英.要素价格扭曲对出口的影响——来自中国制造业的实证分析[J].世界经济研究,2015(06):92-101+129.

[121] 陶然,陆曦,苏福兵,汪晖.地区竞争格局演变下的中国转轨:财政激励和发展模式反思[J].经济研究,2009,44(07):21-33.

[122] 陶然,袁飞,曹广忠.区域竞争、土地出让与地方财政效应:基于1999~2003年中国地级城市面板数据的分析[J].世界经济,2007(10):15-27.

[123] 田光辉,苗长虹,胡志强,苗健铭.环境规制、地方保护与中国污染密集型产业布局[J].地理学报,2018,73(10):1954-1969.

[124] 万道侠,胡彬.产业集聚、金融发展与企业的“创新惰性”[J].产业经济研究,2018(01):28-38.

[125] 王林辉,王辉,董直庆.经济增长和环境质量相容性政策条件——环境技术进步方向视角下的政策偏向效应检验[J].管理世界,2020,36(03):39-60.

[126] 王媛,杨广亮.为经济增长而干预:地方政府的土地出让策略分析[J].管理世界,2016(05):18-31.

[127] 许抄军.基于环境质量的中国城市规模探讨[J].地理研究,2009,28(03):792-802.

[128] 闫逢柱,苏李,乔娟.产业集聚发展与环境污染关系的考察——来自中国制造业的证据[J].科学学研究,2011,29(01):79-83+120.

[129] 颜燕,贺灿飞,刘涛,满燕云.工业用地价格竞争、集聚经济与企业区位选择——基于中国地级市企业微观数据的经验研究[J].城市发展研究,2014,21(03):9-13.

[130] 杨仁发.产业集聚能否改善中国环境污染[J].中国人口?资源与环境,2015,25(02):23-29.

[131] 叶建亮.知识溢出与企业集群[J].经济科学,2001(03):23-30.

[132] 于津平,吴小康.战略性新兴产业发展中的区域竞争与地方政府补贴[J].经济理论与经济管理,2016(03):101-112.

[133] 余泳泽,宋晨晨,容开建.土地资源错配与环境污染[J].财经问题研究,2018(09):43-51.

[134] 张敬博. 动漫产业集群中“政策租”效应及其对集群知识创新绩效的影响[D].陕西师范大学,2013.

[135] 张军,吴桂英,张吉鹏.中国省际物质资本存量估算:1952—2000[J].经济研究,2004(10):35-44.

[136] 张可,豆建民.集聚对环境污染的作用机制研究[J].中国人口科学,2013(05):105-116+128.

[137] 张可,汪东芳.经济集聚与环境污染的交互影响及空间溢出[J].中国工业经济,2014(06):70-82.

[138] 张立新,朱道林,陈庚,杜挺.长江三角洲典型城市工业用地价格偏离时空差异及影响因素研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(01):13-21.

[139] 张莉,程可为,赵敬陶.土地资源配置和经济发展质量——工业用地成本与全要素生产率[J].财贸经济,2019,40(10):126-141.

[140] 张莉,王贤彬,徐现祥.财政激励、晋升激励与地方官员的土地出让行为[J].中国工业经济,2011(04):35-43.

[141] 张清勇.中国地方政府竞争与工业用地出让价格[J].制度经济学研究,2006(01):184-199.

[142] 张子龙,薛冰,陈兴鹏,李勇进.中国工业环境效率及其空间差异的收敛性[J].中国人口?资源与环境,2015,25(02):30-38.

[143] 赵爱栋,蓝菁,马贤磊,许实.土地价格市场化对中国工业部门要素投入与技术选择的影响[J].财经研究,2016,42(08):85-96.

[144] 郑江淮,高彦彦,胡小文.企业“扎堆”、技术升级与经济绩效——开发区集聚效应的实证分析[J].经济研究,2008(05):33-46.

[145] 周飞舟. 以利为利: 财政关系与地方政府行为[M]. 上海三联书店, 2012.

[146] 周黎安.中国地方官员的晋升锦标赛模式研究[J].经济研究,2007(07):36-50.

[147] 朱英明,杨连盛,吕慧君,沈星.资源短缺、环境损害及其产业集聚效果研究——基于21世纪我国省级工业集聚的实证分析[J].管理世界,2012(11):28-44.