中文摘要：

基于不同投资形态对经济、社会与政治目标的贡献差异,研究了政府干预下的资本投向选择效应,及其导致的投资结构异化对总体效率的影响.研究发现,（1）地方政府有动机干预国企增加固定资产、股权并购和垄断资产投资,削减技术资产投资.（2）在政府干预程度较大的地区,国资委直属企业的固定资产投资规模和增速最大;企业集团所属企业的股权投资增长趋势最为强劲;这与政府干预的动机和方式密切相关.（3）央企的资本投向选择更容易突破地方政府对垄断资源的管制;民营资本在垄断资源领域更容易被政府管制挤出.（4）政府对企业投资取向的干预,从规模和结构分布两方面损害了投资效率;而市场化和法治化进程的推进,可以调整政府与企业在资源配置中的功能与边界.上述研究发现,为进一步改进以GDP为中心的单极考评体制,提高政府治理水平提供了理论和经验依据.

英文摘要：

Based on the explanation of the different investment asset＇s contribution to the government＇s targets in economy,society and politics,this paper studies the capital allocation＇s selection effect under the government intervention and the overall investment efficiency influenced by the subsequent investment structure dissimilation.The study found that：（1） local government has the motivation to intervene state-owned enterprises to increase the fixed asset investment,equity merger and monopolistic asset investment and at the same time to cut the technical asset investment;（2）In the region with greater degree of government intervention,the scale of the fixed asset invested by the enterprises directly under local State-owned Assets Supervision Administration Commission（SASAC） increases the most and the fast;the equity investment of enterprises owned by enterprise group has the strongest growth trend;They are closely related to the motivation and type of the government intervention;（3）the state-owned enterprises can break through the local government＇s control over the monopolistic resources more easily;But the private enterprises are more likely to be squeezed out by the government in the field of the monopolistic resources;（4）the government intervention on the capital allocation impairs the investment efficiency from both aspects of the investment scale and distribution;However,the process of marketization and institutionalization can obviously adjust the boundary and function of the government and enterprises in the resource allocation.This study provides a theoretical and empirical basis for improving the efficiency of GDP-centered unipolar evaluation system and the level of governance.