国际金融研究
國際金融研究
국제금융연구
Studies of International Finance
2015年
3期
3~12
,共null页
量化宽松货币政策 溢出效应 出口 脉冲响应 方差分解
量化寬鬆貨幣政策 溢齣效應 齣口 脈遲響應 方差分解
양화관송화폐정책 일출효응 출구 맥충향응 방차분해
Quantitative Easing Curreney Policy; Spillover Effects; Exports; Impulse Response; Variance Decomposition
货币政策的国际溢出效应一直是开放经济学领域关注的热点问题。在美国逐步退出量化宽松货币政策的背景下.研究美国货币政策对中国出口的溢出效应具有重要的理论和现实意义。本文采用2009年6月至2013年12月中国行业层面的出口数据,运用SVAR模型分析发现.美国量化宽松货币政策对中国出口整体上表现为“以邻为壑”效应,但对不同行业的影响存在很大差异.对于低技术行业有微弱的正向溢出效应,对中高技术行业有一定程度的负向溢出效应。方差分解结果表明.美国量化宽松货币政策对于非金属矿物制品、金属制品、机械设备制造等行业的出口波动具有一定的解释力。因此,为应对美国退出量化宽松货币政策可能带来的风险.应当重点关注这些行业的出口波动.
貨幣政策的國際溢齣效應一直是開放經濟學領域關註的熱點問題。在美國逐步退齣量化寬鬆貨幣政策的揹景下.研究美國貨幣政策對中國齣口的溢齣效應具有重要的理論和現實意義。本文採用2009年6月至2013年12月中國行業層麵的齣口數據,運用SVAR模型分析髮現.美國量化寬鬆貨幣政策對中國齣口整體上錶現為“以鄰為壑”效應,但對不同行業的影響存在很大差異.對于低技術行業有微弱的正嚮溢齣效應,對中高技術行業有一定程度的負嚮溢齣效應。方差分解結果錶明.美國量化寬鬆貨幣政策對于非金屬礦物製品、金屬製品、機械設備製造等行業的齣口波動具有一定的解釋力。因此,為應對美國退齣量化寬鬆貨幣政策可能帶來的風險.應噹重點關註這些行業的齣口波動.
화폐정책적국제일출효응일직시개방경제학영역관주적열점문제。재미국축보퇴출양화관송화폐정책적배경하.연구미국화폐정책대중국출구적일출효응구유중요적이론화현실의의。본문채용2009년6월지2013년12월중국행업층면적출구수거,운용SVAR모형분석발현.미국양화관송화폐정책대중국출구정체상표현위“이린위학”효응,단대불동행업적영향존재흔대차이.대우저기술행업유미약적정향일출효응,대중고기술행업유일정정도적부향일출효응。방차분해결과표명.미국양화관송화폐정책대우비금속광물제품、금속제품、궤계설비제조등행업적출구파동구유일정적해석력。인차,위응대미국퇴출양화관송화폐정책가능대래적풍험.응당중점관주저사행업적출구파동.
The spillover effects of monetary policies have always been the hot topics in the field of open economy macroeconomics. It has significant theoretical and practical implications to analyze the impact of U.S. monetary policy on China's export since the Federal Reserve began to withdraw from the Quantitative Easing Policy. Using a SVAR model and utilizing China's industry-level export data for the period from June 2009 to December 2013, this paper finds that the U.S. Quantitative Easing Policy has broad beggar-thy-neighbor effect on China's exports, but exerts different influence on different industries. Specifically, it has weak positive spillover effects on low technology industries, while has strong nega- tive spillover effects on high technology industries. Variance decomposition analyses indicate that the U.S. Quantitative Easing Policy has a certain impact on the fluctuations of export in nonmetallic mineral products industry, metal products industry and machinery and equipment products industry. Therefore, the results suggest that in order to control the risk of the U.S. Quantitative Easing Policy, different policies should be made for different industries separately, especially for thesensitive industries.