撤县设区调整影响土地财政的实证分析 摘要 撤县设区调整自其诞生以来就一直受到社会的关注和学界的研究，在结合其他研究的基础上，我们发现现有研究将撤县设区调整带来的政策影响主要归结于两点，即城市空间扩张和市县级政府权力调整但是由于现有研究也有两个不足之处：一、探讨主要停留在理论分析层面，二、大量案例的负面影响效果又似乎与不断兴起的撤县设区热潮相矛盾所以作者以撤县设区设区前后城市的土地出让价格和城市政府拥有土地资源作为观察变量，观察撤县设区对城市政府的土地财政影响，同时也是对政策效果的一个补充 本文以土地财政资源作为典型代表，观察撤县设调整给市级政府的土地财政权力和资源（主要指土地出让相关权限和土地出让金）带来的影响当然以土地财政权力和资源作为典型代表的原因还在于政府本身对土地财政资源扩张的冲动性，以及市级政府在撤县设区调整下扩张土地财政的可行性这个可能主要通过以下两点实现，其一，在权限调整背景下，城市政府通过撤县设区集中了外围县的土地财政相关权限，实现了其所控制的土地财政资源扩张其二，在城市土地出让价格"中心-外围";分布格局下主城区土地出让价格高，外围区土地出让价低，外围区域的土地出让价格通常是中心区域的底价标准，将外围县撤县设区转化城市的新辖区后，无疑为城市的原有区域的所有土地增加了一道外围圈层的土地价格参考，刷新了主城区土地出让的基础底价，带来主城区范围内土地出让价格标准的抬升。
作者首先利用城市面板数据，以撤县设区和城市区域土地出让收入分别为政策变量和因变量，通过双向固定效应模型进行回归分析，发现撤县设区确实带来城市主城区土地出让收入的确显著上升，而且通过对出让土地的用途进行细分之后发现，撤县设区主要带来了城市住宅用地出让收入的增加接着文章对撤县设区引起土地出让收入上升的原因进行机制分析，通过本文研究我们发现在长期情况下撤县设区后市级政府能够通过平稳回收土地审批等相关权限获得土地财政资源的扩张，从而扩张土地出让收入；而在短期情形下，撤县设区主要通过第二种路径影响城市土地价格作者以土地出让价格为因变量，以撤县设区为政策变量进行双向固定效应回归，结果显示撤县设区显著提高了城市主城区范围内以住宅用地为主的土地出让价格接着作者对撤县设区产生带来土地出让价格增长的原因进行逻辑分析，利用城市主城区和撤设新区之间的土地价格数据构建面板var 模型通过 var 模型证明当外围区的住宅用地出让价格标准抬高时确实能带来主城区的住宅土地出让价格标准抬高最后以县（县级市）是否被选择撤县设区为被解释变量，以 07 到 11 年县的平均数据为解释变量建立多元回归模型，发现当县的土地出让价格越高时，其被选择为撤县设区目标的可能性越高。
通过以上的实证，我们发现城市政府利用撤县设区改革影响主城区土地出让价格是通过以下这一条路径：将土地出让价格较高的县或县级市转化为市辖区，在城市土地价格"中心-外围";的分布格局下以外围区的出让价格为主城区区域内的土地设立一个较高的出让价格下限标准，从而带来主城区内土地出让均价的普遍上涨 通过本文研究我们发现在长期情况下，撤县设区将县转为区，市县关系转化为市区关系，使得市级政府能够通过回收土地审批等相关权限获得土地财政资源的扩张；在短期情形下，通过撤县设区塑造城市新的土地价格分布格局，通过确定城市外围土地出让价格的确立，推动中心区域土地出让价格标准的上升带来城市土地收入的最终增长 关键词：撤县设区；土地财政；土地出让价格 ABSTRACT The Setting County to District has been concerned by the society and theacademic circles since its birth However, from the whole process of academicresearch, we find that the existing research mainly attributes the policy impact of theadjustment of setting districts by withdrawing counties to two points, namely, theexpansion of urban space and the adjustment of power of municipal and Countygovernments However, there are two shortcomings in the existing research: first, thediscussion mainly stays at the level of theoretical analysis; second, the negativeeffects of a large number of cases seem to contradict the rising upsurge ofwithdrawing counties and establishing districts Therefore, the author takes the landtransfer price and the land resources owned by the city government before and afterthe withdrawal of counties and districts as observation variables to observe the impactof the withdrawal of counties and districts on the land finance of the city government,which is also a supplement to the policy effect This paper takes the land financial resources as a typical representative toobserve the impact of The Setting County to District on the land financial power andresources of municipal governments (mainly referring to the relevant authority of landtransfer and land transfer funds) Of course, the reason for the typical representationof land financial power and resources lies in the impulse of the government itself toexpand land financial resources, and the feasibility of the municipal government toexpand land finance under the adjustment of withdrawing counties and establishingdistricts This may be achieved mainly through the following two points Firstly,under the background of authority adjustment, the city government centralized theland finance related authority of peripheral counties by withdrawing counties andsetting up districts, and realized the expansion of land financial resourcesSecondly,under the distribution pattern of "center-periphery" of urban land transfer price, theland transfer price of the main urban area is high, the land transfer price of theperiphery area is low, and the land transfer price of the periphery area is usually thebase price standard of the central area After the withdrawal of the periphery countiesand the establishment of districts into the new jurisdiction of the city, there is no doubtthat a periphery layer of land has been added to all the land in the original area of thecity Price reference refreshes the basic base price of land transfer in the main urban area, and brings up the standard of land transfer price in the main urban area Firstly, the author uses the urban panel data to analyze the policy variables anddependent variables of land transfer income in the withdrawal of counties and urbanareas respectively Through the regression analysis of the two-way fixed effect model,the author finds that the withdrawal of counties and districts really brings about asignificant increase in land transfer income in the main urban areas of the city Furthermore, after subdividing the use of land transfer, the author finds that thewithdrawal of counties and districts mainly brings about the increase of land transferincome Increase in income from urban residential land transfer Then, the paperanalyses the mechanism of the increase of land transfer income caused by thewithdrawal of counties and districts, and finds that in the long run, after thewithdrawal of c。