M1、M2增速“剪刀差”的成因及对其未来走势的判断

近一段时间,M1与M2增速“剪刀差”问题,引发各方广泛关注.本报告认为,M1增速快速上升,主要是因为近一年来政府债券和公司信用类债券超量发行,使得银行存款明显“活期化”,这是造成M1、M2增速“剪刀差”持续扩大的最根本的原因;M2增速明显回落,则是因人民币贷款增速持续走低、外汇占款持续负增长、同业存单大量发行等因素综合作用的结果.考虑到M2增速指标已失去其应有的政策参考价值,建议管理层今后将更多注意力放在如何保持“现金+活期存款”等更能如实反映实体经济现实购买力变化的指标的稳定增长上来.建议央行在补充银行间市场基础货币供应时,优先采用“降准”工具,而非“中期借贷便利”(MLF)或“抵押补充贷款”(PSL)等“类再贷款”工具.     

如何看待当前M1增速走低

当前，M1增速低迷，主要原因是单位活期存款增速放缓和货币乘数下降。受企业活期存款被理财产品分流、企业外部融资增多等因素影响，M1增速存在一定程度的低估，与实体经济基本面和企业资金面的关联度有所降低。因此，不能仅由极低的M1增速就得出资金过紧的结论，对社会资金面的判断要综合M2和社会融资总量等多个指标，更加注重市场化的价格信号。为防止货币供应量增速“过冷”加剧经济下行风险。需通过公开市场操作投放资金来缓解基础货币增速下降势头，通过及时下调法定存款准备金率来改善货币乘数，要更加注重运用利率、汇率等价格型工具来调整和引导货币需求。     

正确看待我国M2存量与名义GDP比值偏高问题

通货膨胀无论何时何地都是一种货币现象。但M2存量与名义GDP的比值并不是反映通胀压力大小的适宜指标,其适宜指标是M2的增速。我国M2与GDP的比值偏高,一方面是因货币供应量增速偏高(货币供应过量)造成的;另一方面,也要看到,最根本的原因是我国资本市场不发达,投资品过于单一。     

正确看待我国M2存量与名义GDPbb值偏高问题

通贷膨胀无论何时何地都是一种货币现象。但M2存量与名义GDP的比值并不是反映通胀压力大小的适宜指标,其适宜指标是M2的增速。我国M2与GDP的比值偏高,一方面是因货币供应量增速偏高（货币供应过量）造成的;另一方面,也要看到,最根本的原因是我国资本市场不发达,投资品过于单一。     

中企出现利率陷阱

<正>当前中国的金融市场要注意三个问题:第一,M2占GDP的比重超过200%,但融资难、融资贵问题依然存在,同时利息也很高。货币政策调整思路应该是利率下降,但信贷又是缩紧的,这就成了宽货币紧信贷。第二,货币发行走向问题。M2增速达到14.7%,但M1增速不到8%,过去两年中,M1跟M2的增速显现出很大的问题,而且缺口越来越大,形成剪刀差。第三,从利率结构看,短端利率持     

货币增速剪刀差与CPI相关性的实证研究

货币供应量作为我国的货币政策中介目标存在很多争议,但是现阶段依然具有不可替代的作用,在重视货币总量的同时,应分析货币结构的变化,实现对货币供应量中介目标的改良是一个现实选择。本文通过对2001年1月—2010年12月的宏观月度数据的研究,发现货币增速剪刀差与CPI之间存在着显著的正相关关系。在样本期内,货币增速剪刀差与通货膨胀之间互为格兰杰因果关系,货币增速剪刀差的变化体现为4期之后的CPI变化,当期货币增速剪刀差每增加一个单位则4个月之后的CPI上升0.049个单位。央行应将货币结构尤其是货币增速剪刀差作为货币供应量数量指标的补充,同时考虑对货币结构进行调控,以增强货币政策效用。     

我国M2/GDP持续走高之谜——基于货币供给和金融体制视角的分析

改革开放以来,我国广义货币供应量M2与GDP的比例持续升高,由于这一指标反应了一国货币化程度和金融深化程度,过高的比率与我国金融发展现实不符。本文重点从货币供给和金融体制两方面探讨了M2/GDP持续走高形成的原因,并分析了这两个原因之间的内在机理,最后探讨了适度合理的M2/GDP比例的政策建议。     

经济"脱实向虚"的流动性风险——基于货币增速剪刀差与资产价格相互作用的分析

文章从货币增速剪刀差与资产价格相互作用机制的角度,对我国经济整体出现资金"脱实务虚"、"虚绑架实"现象的原因及由此产生的流动性风险进行了理论与实证分析,并提出了经济"脱虚入实"的途径和有效措施.结果表明,货币增速剪刀差与资产价格的相互作用存在区制性特征,在货币政策宽松而经济下行的区制内两者之间的作用增强.虽然当前中国未达到出现流动性陷阱的零利率条件,但是资产价格与货币增速剪刀差之间的作用明显加剧,而货币增速剪刀差又与GDP 增速呈逆向变动关系,表明存在低利率下货币政策空间收窄、有效性降低的风险,流动性陷阱风险仍然值得注意.     

人民币的储备货币作用开始显现

随着中国经济发展和人民币持续升值,人民币投资产品已经成为近年来的市场热点。汇丰银行、新加坡星展银行等陆续在新加坡发行离岸人民币债券,新加坡成为第三个发行人民币债券的离岸中心。备类市场交易主体对人民币的接受度不断上升,     

中国的M2／GDP：理论、问题、对策

M2／GDP实质上是从一个角度展示整个经济发展的问题,它蕴涵了国民经济发展中的各种关系,其水平与变动由一国的融资体制所决定。从国别比较看,以银行主导型融资体制为主的国家,相对具有较高的M2／GDP。中国M2／GDP在市场化改革进程中呈持续上升趋势,根源于中国市场化改革进程中所形成的政府主导型的信用融资机制,因此,较高的M2／GDP所隐含的风险,实质是融资体制的风险。消除较高的M2／GDP所隐含的风险,不能靠简单地压缩贷款和居民储蓄存款的办法,关键在于融资体制的改革。     

政府科技投入成本效益分析

政府科技投入的有效和高效是创新型国家建设的重要保证，基于2009-2014年我国东中西部九省（市）的面板数据，通过科学选取“成本-效益”评价指标体系，应用超效率CCR模型和Malmquist指数模型，计算和比较了各省政府科技投入成本效益，探求了政府科技投入成本效益的变动趋势及影响因素。在此基础上，提出了九省（市）政府科技投入的相关建议。     

Stability of the demand for M1 and harmonized M3 in Finland

We derive a theoretical model for the demand for money using the adjustment cost augmented money-in-the-utility-function approach. The steady-state-utility function-parameters of the model of narrow money (M1) estimated with cointegration techniques are stable over the foreign exchange rate regime shift; whereas in the model of harmonized M3 (M3H) they arenot stable. The theoretical model fits the M1 data. The adjustment cost parameters of the M1 model describing the dynamics of the demand for money might indicate technological improvements in banking and payments during the sample period. These results suggest that from the Finnish point of view M1 would be a more appropriate intermediate target for monetary policy than harmonized M3.The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily the views of the Bank of Finland. I thank Juha Tarkka, Jouko Vilmunen, Pekka Ilmakunnas, Erkki Koskela, Paolo Paruolo, Anders Rahbek, Pentti Saikkonen, Juha Seppälä, Matti Virén and the participants of ESEM96 meeting and Money Demand in Europe conference (October 1997, Berlin) for useful comments and discussions and two anonymous referees and the editors for profound and constructive comments. The usual disclaimer applies. The data may be obtained from the internet, http://wotan.wiwi.hu-berlin.de/oekonometrie/engl/data.html     

M1 demand and volatility

The reasons for the instability within the M1 market during the 1970s and 1980s have been attributed to an actual breakdown in the M1 market, multicollinearity, or an inappropriate specification. The present paper offers a more general reason: increased volatility within the money demand determinants produced an econometric environment which made estimation of the relationship problematic. In order to investigate this possibility, the traditional demand vector is re-estimated with additional generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity representation for income, inflation, and interest rate volatility as conditioning variables. The rolling regression results highlight a significant stability within the M1 demand vector and its long- and short-run parameters. I wish to thank, without implicating, two anonymous referees for helpful comments and suggestions     

对MM理论命题Ⅰ的理论分析

MM理论命题Ⅰ所讨论的企业价值仅仅指企业负债价值和股票价值之和,因此不可避免地会出现企业所得税影响企业价值的现象,企业价值会随着企业资本结构的改变而改变.但企业的价值不仅仅包括企业负债价值和企业股票价值,还应该包括企业所得税价值,这样无论在有无企业所得税的情况下,企业资本结构的改变对企业价值都不会产生影响.     

企业融资管理与M-M理论的应用研究

企业的资本结构由企业通过两种融资方式（债权融资和股权融资）所融集资金构成。企业资本结构理论（M－M理论）的具体运用对于企业融资有着重要的指导作用。     

Stability of money demand in Switzerland: A comparison of the M2 and M3 cases

Long-run parameters of money demand functions for Switzerland's M2 and M3 aggregate are estimated and their stability investigated. For both aggregates a single stable cointegrating vector is found. Around these long-run relationships a single-equation model for m2 and a single-equation model for cpi is built respectively for M2 and M3, and both estimated models are found to be stable. Testing forecast performance, the cpi model seems to be superior to the m2 model, providing some positive signs that the M3 model is stable in the sense that it does not suffer from a structural break during the period of estimation.We would like to thank Jürgen Wolters and two anonymous referees for their comments and Neil Ericsson, David Hendry, Katarina Juselius, Helmut Lütkepohl, Grayham Mizon and the other participants of the Workshop on Money Demand in Europe, Berlin, October 10–11, 1997, where an earlier version of the paper was presented, for their suggestions. The data may be obtained from the internet, http://wotan.wiwi.hu-berlin.de/oekonometrie/engl/data.html. The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of the Swiss National Bank.     

Rational expectations and M2 demand

This essay expands on existing studies of M2 money demand. It differs in that it applies a rational expectations approach to an adaptive expectation model. Unlike the adaptive expectations models, the author includes an explanatory variable for expectations of future inflation. The expectation variables used are: the actual inflation rate (t + 1) and the Livingston Survey from the Philadelphia Fed. By using the different measures of expectations the author is able to compare several adaptive expectations models that appear in the literature and the rational expectations models for fit and forecast ability. The empirical results are such that the importance of including the rational expectations variable is evident even though the overall fit of the equation is comparable to one of the existing adaptive expectations models.     

我国企业并购方式的比较与选择

我国企业的并购方式主要分为无偿划拨、协议并购和要约并购三种.通过对这三种并购方式的比较研究,进一步发现协议并购是我国目前并购的主导方式,要约并购是最完全的市场主导并购方式.而随着市场经济的不断完善以及股权分置改革的结束,股份在全流通基础上的要约并购将取代协议并购,成为我国主要的并购方式.