新经济地理学诞生的理论基石

20世纪90年代发展起来的"新经济地理学"具有深厚的理论基础,其一报酬递增思想的演进,其二是复杂科学所强调的自组织、路径依赖和"锁定"等概念,其三是垄断竞争的Dixit-Stiglitz模型框架及其应用.复杂科学的路径依赖与"锁定"等概念为新经济地理学解释经济活动的空间问题提供了基本的认识论基础.Dixit-Stiglitz垄断竞争模型为经济学处理不完全竞争的市场结构提供了技术的可能,其在新贸易理论和新增长理论中的应用为新经济地理学的应用做好了铺垫.在此基础上,新经济地理学应运而生.     

国外新经济理论的研究进展

随着技术变革的深入,新兴技术对经济发展产生的影响更为深入,产生了以知识和创新为核心的新经济,对传统经济理论提出了挑战。特别是金融危机之后,全球经济发展方式发生变革,对新经济理论与方法的研究具有重要现实意义。文章对国外新经济的产生与发展相关理论进行系统梳理与分析、从技术变革与新经济的关系、新经济的理论基础、新经济形态下经济发展方式的变化及其新经济理论的应用领域等方面剖析了国外新经济理论的研究进展,提出未来新经济领域可围绕国家创新体系的战略定位研究、技术变革发展方向的预测方法、技术变革推动经济增长与社会进步的过程分析、新经济理论框架对产业结构影响以及新经济背景对企业发展的影响等方面展开。     

“新”新经济地理学研究脉络梳理与展望

加入了企业异质性的"新"新经济地理学着重从微观企业层面解释经济活动的空间分布。本文阐述了"新"新经济地理学的理论渊源,介绍了"新"新经济地理学的基准模型和分析框架,对"新"新经济地理学经验研究的相关文献进行梳理,从中发掘未来的研究方向:研究视角的拓展、理论框架和模型方法的完善以及与相关研究领域的融合等。     

“新”新经济地理学研究进展

不同于新经济地理学的同质性企业假设,新新经济地理学以垄断竞争和企业异质性为切入点,分析企业成本差异、效率差异与集聚经济的关系,构建了新新经济地理模型。尽管新新经济地理学的相关研究已经引起了极大反响,但仍需要在本地效应、城市集聚的微观基础、组织行为与企业布局关系等方面,进一步解析异质性企业与集聚经济的微观机理,以不断完善新新经济地理学的理论框架。     

新经济地理学视角中的欧洲经济一体化进程

新经济地理学是当代西方经济学领域中继新产业组织理论、新贸易理论、新增长理论之后出现的第四次“新经济学”研究浪潮(Krugman,1998)。它采用了收益递增-不完全竞争模型的建模技巧对空间经济结构与变化过程进行重新考察,其目的在于将经济地理分析纳入主流经济学的范畴之中。新经济地理学除了构建反映经济活动地理集中现象的理论模型外,还特别强调运用所构建的新经济地理模型对典型案例进行实证分析。本文主要介绍新经济地理学的创始人和主要代表人物保罗·克鲁格曼有关欧洲经济一体化进程的典型案例所做的论述,以及由此所引起的学术界的若干争论。     

新经济地理理论研究的新进展

新经济地理理论的创始人保罗·克鲁格曼以规模报酬递增而导致的不完全竞争市场结构为假设前提,在一般均衡模型下讨论了空间经济问题,区别于传统经济地理理论,它引发了众多国外学者从理论扩展及实证分析等层面进行深入研究。本文主要从扩大理论菜单、实证研究以及福利与政策研究三个方面入手,着重回顾了20世纪90年代以及21世纪以来的国外学者关于新经济地理理论的研究成果,期望通过对理论研究的梳理,总结和借鉴区域发展的应对政策。     

集聚与增长整合研究评述

集聚与增长整合研究是新经济地理学的理论前沿,也是对新增长理论的新拓展.通过在新经济地理框架中引入内生增长,集聚与增长整合模型使得我们能够明确地思考经济活动区位与经济增长速度之间的相互作用问题.整合模型阐释了集聚与增长之间的互动关系和机制,加深了我们对一体化现象和政策的理解,得到了比新经济地理更为丰富的结论.对该领域文献进行了系统梳理和分类,总结了其研究框架与方法,并叙述了理论演进的路径.     

新经济对传统财务会计理论和实务的挑战

经济形态的变革必将会对传统的会计产生深远的影响,随着这种建立在先进的知识和发达的技术基础之上的新的经济形态的新经济时代的到来,必将对传统财务会计的理论与实务提出挑战,并可能诱发新的会计革命。一、对会计理论的挑战。1.对会计目标。会计目标是会计理论的基础,现在财务会计把会计信息使用者作为一个整体,提供一种通用的会计报表。在新经济时代,会计信息需求者与作为会计信息提供者的企业之间可以利用互联网及时双向交流;企业在了解会计信息需求者的决策模型后,可以针对其需要,向其提供专门的财务报告。因此在新经济时代,会计报告可…     

新经济地理学“困境”思考

自2008年保罗·克鲁格曼获得诺贝尔经济学奖后,国内学界掀起了一股新经济地理学研究的热潮.人们开始重新思考:新经济地理学的地位、范式及政策影响.本文通过新经济地理学发展的综述,评述新经济地理学理论基础、建模中存在的主要缺陷,并提出相应的解决方法,对未来新经济地理学的发展方向进行预期.     

“新经济”主体与中国商事主体改革

2000年在瑞士达沃斯召开的世界经济论坛上,美国式的低通胀、低利率、低失业率的高增长模式被解释为“新经济现象”,技术性特征是新经济的核心理由,但在现代国家制度化框架以及制度化能力极其强大的情况下,新技术乃至新经济要得以普及化,制度化是极其关键的一环,这一点,自康芒斯以来的制度经济学,尤其是诺思的制度经济学已提供了坚实的理论基础,而且这也为大量的社会实践所证实,本文重点从新经济的主体角度,结合中国目前正进行了公司制改革以及更广泛意义上的商事主体制度谈一些看法。     

The Dynamic Harrod Foreign Trade Multiplier and the Demand-orientated Approach to Economic Growth: an Evaluation

This paper puts forward a demand-orientated model of economic growth, as an alternative to the supply-orientated approach of neoclassical theory, and evaluates the extensive research testing the dynamic Harrod trade multiplier model developed by Thirlwall and extended by McCombie. It is critical of the continued dismissal of demand constraints as an explanation of inter-country growth rate differences in the models of McGregor & Swales, Crafts, Krugman, etc., and in the ‘new’ growth theory literature, although it is sympathetic to the rehabilitation of the role increasing returns for an understanding of cumulative processes which make for divisions in the world economy.     

新国际贸易与经济地理理论及其发展——2008年诺贝尔经济学奖得主的理论贡献

2008年诺贝尔经济学奖得主克鲁格曼将规模经济、产品差异与运输成本引入一般均衡分析模型,其开创性的研究使贸易理论和经济地理这两个曾经是相互独立的经济学分支融合到一起,成为新贸易理论发展的先导;作为创始人,他还将新经济地理学融入了主流经济学。此外,克鲁格曼还与几位合作者打通了新经济地理学与城市地区经济学传统研究之间的通道,并对国际货币经济学做出了重要贡献。     

空间经济研究中马克思主义与新古典两条路径的关联——基于资本逻辑与空间基本规律的比较视角

空间经济学研究的兴起,主要有两条理论路径:第一条是马克思主义政治经济学到"马克思主义地理学"的研究路径,第二条是以马歇尔、克鲁格曼等为代表的空间要素模型分析研究路径。文章认为这两条路径有内在关联,前者是关于经济空间的动力机制的理论,后者是关于经济空间运动形式的理论。空间经济的深层逻辑和具体规律互为表里,为当前中国空间经济学发展提供了启示。     

The Balassa-Samuelson Model: an Overview*

This paper introduces a special issue marking the thirtieth anniversary of the publication of two classic papers in international economics, Balassa (1964) and Samuelson (1964). We provide a brief analytical treatment of the basic model and an overview of the contributions in this special issue. the special issue includes novel empirical and theoretical approaches related to the Balassa-Samuelson model. Theoretical models include dynamic two-sector growth models, two-country general-equilibrium models, and openeconomy models with imperfectly competitive nontraded-goods sectors. Several papers exploit new sources of data or datasets constructed in new ways from traditional sources. “Under the skin of any international economist lies a deep-seated belief in some variant of the PPP theory of exchange rates.” (Rudiger Dornbusch and Paul Krugman, 1976, p. 540)     

马克思的经济增长理论模型

马克思经过二十多年的科学拓荒,独立地开辟了后来被称为经济增长理论的新领域。在经济增长理论史上,马克思第一次将静态分析动态化、短期分析长期化,建立了第一个经济增长理论模型。马克思主义经济学家费里德曼以马克思经济增长理论模型为根据,建立了第一个经济增长数学模型。研究马克思经济增长理论模型以及后来马克思主义经济学家据此建立的经济增长数学模型,借鉴西方经济增长模型中的合理因素,从实际出发,深入探索相关理论和现实问题,对弘扬和发展马克思主义经济增长理论具有重大意义。     

Productive Capacity, Product Varieties, and the Elasticities Approach to the Trade Balance

Most macroeconomic models imply that faster income growth tends either to lower a country’s trade balance by raising its imports with little change to its exports or to reduce its terms of trade in order to maintain balanced trade. Krugman (1989 ) proposed a model in which countries grow by producing new varieties of goods. In his model, faster‐growing countries are able to export these new goods and maintain balanced trade without suffering any deterioration in their terms of trade. This paper analyzes the growth of US imports from different source countries and finds strong support for Krugman’s model.     

Putting the "New" into New Trade Theory: Paul Krugman's Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics

This paper reviews the scientific contributions of Paul Krugman to the study of international trade, on the occasion of his receipt of the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics. A simplified exposition is presented of some of his principal findings, including: the effects of trade on firm scale and product diversity in a general model of monopolistic competition; the integration of monopolistic competition with factor endowments theory; the implications of transport costs, including home-market effects and the possibility of agglomeration in models of economic geography; and the positive and normative consequences of oligopolistic trade.     

What Do Progressives Need to Know About Trade? Some observations on the competitiveness debate

In a recent book entitled Pop Internationalism Paul Krugman takes to task several prominent commentators who in recent years have published works decrying the loss of competitive position of the United States in an increasingly global economy. In particular, Krugman critically considers and rejects several arguments that he considers both wrong and dangerous. Among these are (1) the United States has lost, or is in the process of losing, its position of global technological leadership; (2) material standards of living in the US are threatened by the country's excessively liberal trade policies as compared with its trade partners; (3) stagnant or declining wages in the US are the result of trade with low wage Third World countries; (4) the US is in need of a new model and a corresponding policy approach that recognizes the changing structure of new global economic forces. The debate over the validity of the above assertions has been largely conducted between adherents of mainstream interpretations of international economic theory and policy. For Krugman the controversies are mostly a matter of a proper understanding of that theory along with an appreciation of the relevant data. The purpose of this paper is to offer an interpretation of the debate from a progressive left perspective. My position is that Krugman's critique of his imagined opponents on most issues is largely overdone and that there is actually substantive agreement among and between these mainstream views on most matters of trade and trade policy. More importantly, however, these same views, including Krugman's, are bounded by assumptions that are not supportable from a progressive left perspective. The title of the paper is an ironic twist on a title of one of Krugman's chapters, 'What do undergrads need to know about trade?'     

The export price index with the effect of variety and an empirical analysis

The standard international trade models predict that economic growth induces decreasing export prices. Korea has recorded sustainable economic and export growth, and its export prices have been deteriorating over the last decades. Unlike the standard assumption of one good per country, the new theoretical approach by Krugman [Krugman, P. (1980) ‘Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and Pattern of Trade’. American Economic Review 70, 950–959, Krugman, P. (1989) ‘Differences in income elasticities and trends in real exchange rates’. European Economic Review, 33, 1055–1085.], and Helpman and Krugman [Helpman, E. and Krugman, P. (1985), Market structure and foreign trade: increasing returns, imperfect competition, and international economy, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.] takes into account varieties of goods produced in each country. And many studies suggest that traditional estimates without variety effect have been rather under-stated. Therefore this paper develops a proper modeling for quantifying the impact of export variety on an exact export price index. Throughout the period (1984–2000), the conventional export price index without variety effect leads to under-state Korea's export price by 89.3%. This paper shows that the fall in Korean export prices has been offset by the effect of export variety. This paper emphasizes the effect of export variety on international trade.