经济全球化是否扩大收入的不平等

本文回顾了在经济全球化背景下,19世纪初到20世纪末全球收入不平等的演变,分析了发达国家和发展中国家国内收入不平等以及国家间收入不平等的状况,认为经济全球化并非是全球收入不平等扩大的原因。     

全球金融危机的根源及其启示

本次金融危机是发生在全球化背景下的生产过剩型资本主义经济危机。全球化带来了生产要素和生产力的全球扩张,同时也造成了全球性的贫富两极分化,引起有效需求不足和全球生产过剩。以美国为首的发达国家为了解决这一基本矛盾,利用金融、保险和房地产业的财富效应,盲目发展金融与房地产业,同时从新型工业化国家攫取储蓄的债务经济模式来刺激消费和投资,从而酿成世界经济的结构性失衡和祸及全球的泡沫经济。     

从金融全球化的不平衡发展看次贷危机根源

本文利用131个国家和地区在1970～2006年的金融数据,对美国、其它发达国家、新兴市场国家和发展中国家参与金融全球化的进程中资产和负债的总量增长、结构演变和分配格局进行了量化分析,揭示了当前世界金融体系不平衡发展的动态路径和数量特征,并由此探讨次贷危机的宏观层面的根源。     

经济自由化和全球化对发展中国家和转型国家收入不平等的影响

本文讨论过去 2 0年来全球范围、国家之间和国家内部不平等的发展趋势。通过与 1870～ 1914年第一波全球化过程中收入集中情况的对比 ,文章展示 ,与标准理论关于世界经济自由化变化的预测相反 ,过去 2 0年间全球不平等加剧了 ,先前出现的国内不平等有所降低的状况从 2 0世纪 80年代以来开始逆转。最后 ,通过分析和强调自由化、全球化和收入分配之间关系 ,指出了可能导致产生这些变化的原因。     

平等、公平与经济发展

我国人均收入与世界发达国家相差很大,收入不平等的扩大,在相当长的时间内,可能属于“正常情况”,并不违反市场经济条件下的基本的公平原则。但是,必须加紧社会保障体系的建立,防止较大社会群体生活水平绝对下降的情况发生,使绝大多数人能在一定程度上分享经济增长的好处。同时,又要防止过早采取发达国家关于收入公平分配的过高标准．简单地要求立刻实现收入平等,那样反倒会延缓经济发展进程,使平等更晚而不是更早到来。     

数字普惠金融的创业效应与收入不平等:数字鸿沟还是数字红利？

数字普惠金融与实体经济之间的关系受到学界广泛关注,但其究竟是普惠的数字红利还是金融领域的数字鸿沟,这是数字普惠金融快速发展中亟需回答的重要理论与现实问题。文章通过匹配宏观统计数据和微观调查数据,实证研究了数字普惠金融的发展对收入不平等的影响,并从创业效应这一渠道进行了机制分析。研究发现：数字普惠金融的发展总体上改善了收入不平等状况,而数字普惠金融的创业效应是影响收入不平等的重要渠道之一。进一步的中介效应分析表明,数字普惠金融的创业效应对收入不平等的影响存在异质性：数字普惠金融通过促进生存型创业从而改善了收入不平等,而数字普惠金融对机会型创业的促进却在一定程度上扩大了收入不平等。文章的研究结论对于理解数字普惠金融发展的正外部性以及如何缓解收入不平等提供了新的视角。     

变化中的世界

过去40年,在金融、货币和贸易的推动下,全球实体经济发生了巨大的结构变化,从根本上改变了我们对全球经济关联的结构的理解。各个国家在全球经济中的变化、政策不一样,使其在全球经济和金融中的地位也发生了根本变化。全球增长的重心正在从发达国家转向新兴经济体。未来5到10年,这一趋势将继续进行。同时,新兴经济体也面临着巨大的挑战。在未来的全球经济增长中,相当程度上将受约束于债务过高和对债务去杠杆化的管理过程。     

如何看待经济全球化？

经济全球化是生产力与生产关系相统一的进程。发达国家垄断生产关系在全球范围内急剧扩张，发达国家的跨国公司已成为全球化的第一推动主体。认为全球化一定会带来经济全面增长，就业增加，人民生活改善，发达国家与不发达国家之间是“互补”，都是“赢家”，是一个认识误区。经济全球化是一把“双刃剑”。全球化的规则是由国际倾向基金组织、世界贸易组织、世界银行等重要世界性组织制定的，谁出了钱谁就有权决定游戏规则，它必然产生利益分配的不平等。最重要是如何采取积极有效的政策，最大限度发挥它的积极作用，遏制它的消极影响。     

中美收入不平等的效应比较及其理论含义

本文从经济增长、发展机会、社会公众态度反应以及政治稳定等角度出发,通过对美国和中国的不平等进行比较,分析中国和美国各自的收入不平等在这些方面的表现和特点,从而说明,不能简单地用基尼系数作为判断收入分配差距大小的惟一依据来判定现实的收入分配是否合理,更重要的是要判定收入不平等究竟产生了什么影响,特别是对经济增长和社会发展产生了何等性质、何等程度的影响,并以此来分析收入不平等的程度以及应该如何对待这个问题。     

全球化的测度与比较

本文通过构造全球化指数,测度全球122个国家或地区1998至2004年的相对全球化水平,并以此对各经济体全球化水平进行排序和分析。除亚洲的新加坡和中国香港外,全球化程度高的经济体基本上为欧洲和北美等发达国家。发展中国家的全球化发展水平大大低于发达国家。     

Globalization and economic inequality in the short and long run: The case of South Korea 1975–1995

We analyse the determinants of the Gini coefficient for income and expenditure in South Korea between 1975 and 1995. In both cases, we do not find support for the Kuznets inverted-U hypothesis. From an economic globalization viewpoint, the opening of goods markets reduces income inequality in both the short run (the Gini coefficient for income) and the long run (the Gini coefficient for expenditure). On the other hand, the opening of capital markets increases income inequality in both the short and the long run, although the latter is not statistically significant. These results suggest that the effect of economic globalization on income inequality has two routes and two different speeds.     

Trade openness and income inequality in China and the SAARC Region

The paper empirically examines the effects of trade liberalisation on income inequality in China and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation countries. Panel data analysis is conducted for the period of 1973 to 2012. The results show that liberal trade policies have increased income inequality in these countries. These results are robust to alternative liberalisation measures. The control variables used have differing effects on income distribution. Per capita income has an increasing effect on income inequality, while education, financial development, financial openness, democracy, and government size are shown to reduce income inequality. These outcomes can be expected to have important policy implications for the use of trade liberalisation in these countries.     

对外开放扩大还是缩小了中国的工资不平等?——来自中国省级面板数据的证据

对外开放与收入差异的关系一直是国际和国内学术界关注的热点问题,之前大多数研究的结论都认为对外开放扩大了中国的收入差异。本文基于1995～2007年的省份面板数据和行业工资数据,使用Pooled OLS、Fixed Effect、Random Effect、IV、GMM等多种计量方法,发现之前研究的结论———对外开放扩大了收入差异或者减少了贫困,可能是由于忽视了省际间的异质性及其变化所导致的。通过使用动态面板数据的工具变量法解决这一问题之后我们发现,对外开放对中国地区内的工资差距并没有直接的影响。     

Income Distribution in East Asian Developing Countries: recent trends

This paper updates estimates of the trends in income distribution in the eight countries of the developing East and Southeast Asian region. In the last update by Krongkaew (1994 ), inequality was found to be increasing in the newly industrialising economies of Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan, while in the ASEAN−4 (with the exception of Thailand) it was declining. Since then, the region has undergone the East Asian financial crisis of 1997–98. Recent data indicate that income distribution in Hong Kong and Taiwan continues to improve. Income inequality in South Korea declined until 1993 but began to increase slowly until the crisis sharply widened the disparity. The evidence for Singapore is mixed, with one set of estimates showing a dip in inequality while another indicates a widening of income disparity during the crisis. The crisis had the immediate impact of improving income distribution in all the ASEAN–4 countries, mainly because of reductions in the income shares of the top income groups. Later data show that inequality has since risen in all of them, except for Malaysia (for which no recent data are available).     

产品内国际分工对收入分配的影响研究

产品内国际分工的发展对参与分工各国的收入分配产生了重要的影响,文章利用中国省级面板数据研究产品内国际分工时我国收入分配的影响.从全国层面角度的分析显示,产品内国际分工显著导致收入分配恶化,在针对中国不同地区的实证研究表明,东中西部地区在参与产品内国际分工的过程中,产品内国际分工对于收入分配的影响方向一致,但是呈现东中西逐渐减弱的态势.在此基础上,验证了产品内国际分工对于收入分配的影响呈现倒“U”曲线特征,实证结果表明当前中国的产品内国际分工的收入分配效应处于倒“U”曲线的上升阶段.     

World economy,level development and income distribution: An integration of different approaches to the explanation of income inequality

The paper briefly outlines explanations of international differences in personal income distribution that have been formulated within the ‘world economy’ and the ‘level of development’ paradigm. The predictive power of the central variables of the paradigms are tested in a cross-national regression analysis with 72 countries. The regression results suggest support for hypotheses from both paradigms, but also suggest a partial integration of theoretical elements from both paradigms. The outcome of the proposed theoretical integration offers a new interpretation of the well-known curvilinear relationship between level of development and income inequality. This new view on the curvature of the relationship expects the integration into the world economy to result in increased income inequality in peripheral countries. But different from other views it is not implied that inequality is substantially reduced in development. The core and periphery position of countries in the world economy is seen to stabilize income inequality differences between these groups of countries. Under these circumstances, developing countries generally cannot be expected to reduce substantially their income inequality in the course of economic growth.     

去工业化对收入不平等的影响:机制分析与实证检验

基于126个国家1991-2017年的面板数据,考察了去工业化对收入不平等的影响。研究发现,去工业化会显著加剧收入不平等程度,这在发展中经济体尤为显著。从传导机制看,去工业化既可以通过劳动力就业转移直接影响收入不平等,也可通过非熟练劳动力就业和服务业部门就业分化间接影响收入不平等。一方面,去工业化导致非熟练劳动力受到更大冲击,致使该部分劳动力失业,加剧收入不平等;另一方面,去工业化导致非熟练劳动力的就业从工业的高薪部门转移至服务业的低薪部门,最终影响收入不平等。进一步研究发现,在可能存在"过早去工业化"的国家去工业化对收入不平等的作用更加明显。因此发展中经济体要着重预防由于去工业化可能带来的收入不平等程度恶化。     

Structural Changes and Regional Income Inequality in Indonesia: A Bidimensional Decomposition Analysis*

Using the bidimensional decomposition method of a population‐weighted coefficient of variation, this paper analyzes the changes in the determinants of interprovincial income inequality associated with structural changes in Indonesia from 1983 to 2004. The method unifies two inequality decompositions by regional groups and gross regional product components (industrial sectors) and, therefore, enables us to assess the contributions of gross regional product components to within‐region and between‐region inequalities, as well as to overall inequality. As the share of mining has decreased, the spatial distribution of manufacturing has played a more important role in the inequality of Sumatra and Kalimantan, while the primacy of Jakarta, with strong urbanization economies, facilitated by globalization and trade and financial liberalization, has determined much of the Java–Bali region's inequality and, therefore, overall inequality in Indonesia.     

The distribution of ncome in the UK and OECD countries in the twentieth century

Distributional changes are an important part of the economichistory of the OECD countries over the twentieth century. Inthe UK, income inequality in the 1970s was substantially lowerthan 40 years earlier, and is now much higher than in 1979.The pattern of change in the USA has similarities to that inthe UK, but other countries have exhibited significant differences.In order to explain diversity of experience over time, and differencesin income inequality across countries today, we need to recognizethat the distribution of income is subject to a variety of forces,affecting earnings, wealth, and income. These forces includethe policy choices made by governments affecting market incomesand fiscal redistribution. What we need to explain is why insome periods a number of these forces combine to produce episodesof rising, or falling, inequality. Any single theory, such asthat based on a global shift of demand away from unskilled workers,cannot provide a fully adequate explanation.