CAJ | 학술논문

新古典主义经济学和凯恩斯主义经济学对就业问题都提出了各自的理论见解。但是，由于这些理论分析范式各异，欠缺合理的对话平台。本文试图根据相关文献中“模型构建不同完成条件”构建一共同分析框架，对这些理论的代表性失业模型进行重新阐释和对比。通过分析比较发现，这两大理论体系关键区别之一在于对定价行为的看法，前者将厂商视为“价格的接受者”，而后者将厂商视为“价格的制定者”。
신고전주의경제학화개은사주의경제학대취업문제도제출료각자적이론견해。단시，유우저사이론분석범식각이，흠결합리적대화평태。본문시도근거상관문헌중“모형구건불동완성조건”구건일공동분석광가，대저사이론적대표성실업모형진행중신천석화대비。통과분석비교발현，저량대이론체계관건구별지일재우대정개행위적간법，전자장엄상시위“개격적접수자”，이후자장엄상시위“개격적제정자”。
The comparative analysis of the various Neoclassical and Keynesian theories of unemployment is of importance but has been unsatisfactory in the relevant literature, because of lacking a reasonable analytical framework that could faithfully represent the essential ideas of both of the two theoretical traditions. The objective of this paper is to attempt an analysis of this kind, by means of drawing and improving on the analytical framework of＂alternative closures＂. From our comparative analysis,it can be found that both of the two traditions of macroeconomics have their respective＂micro-foundations＂, namely, price-setting agents in Keynesian models, price-taking agents in Neoclassical models.