经济学的实验方法与演化模拟分析

经济实验是一种应用于经济学研究的实验形式。大量的演化经济模型借助经济学实验的方法和技术工具，在计算机上模拟微观个体的行为并为宏观分析和微观基础之间建立了有效的桥梁。我国正处于由计划经济向市场经济转轨阶段，传统宏观经济模型在许多新的经济现象和经济政策面前无能为力，运用演化模拟实验深入分析我国经济运行的基本规律，具有重要的理论和实践意义。     

行为与实验经济学对传统经济学的挑战

一、引言 2002年诺贝尔经济学奖授予了美国普林斯顿大学以色列藉心理学家卡尼曼(DanielKahneman)教授和美国乔治·梅森大学经济学家史密斯(Vernon L.Smith)教授,以表彰他们分别“把心理学研究和经济学研究有效地结合,从而解释了在不确定条件下如何判断与决策”和“发展了一整套实验研究方法,尤其     

行为与实验经济学的奠基人

长期以来,经济学就被广泛地认为是一门非实验的科学。似乎经济学研究只能借助于对真实经济生活的观察,而与可控的实验室实验无关。同时许多经济学家也认识到,把人看作是受利己心趋动的、有完全的理性决策能力的同质经济人的这种理论假设,在     

演化经济学的演化与企业技术创新分析的新思路

演化经济学是近几年兴起的经济学流派。其基本特征就是运用演化分析方法研究动态经济过程。它借鉴生物进化的思想和自然科学多领域的研究成果,将技术变迁和创新看作经济发展的根本力量,以动态的、演化的理念来分析和理解经济系统的运行和发展。目前,演化经济学已日益得到经济学界广泛的重视,并对其他学科的发展产生了深远的影响。本文回顾了演化经济学的产生、发展及其主要的理论,并分析了演化经济学的产生对企业技术创新发展的影响。     

论经济学实验的科学设计

实验经济学利用经济学实验检验已有的经济理论，发现新的经济规律。经济学实验方法不仅在理论上取得了丰富的成果，而且也解决了一些实际问题。设计科学的经济学实验，是想采用实验方法进行研究的经济学家所必须面对的首要问题。从实验程序标准化、货币激励显化、实验语言无偏化、比较基准明确化、与现实的一致性等五个方面讨论如何设计科学的经济学实验，是构建经济学实验的重要方向。     

实验经济学研究综述

一、实验经济学的由来和发展 新古典综合派代表萨缪尔森认为,经济学是研究复杂的、自然存在的市场系统的学科,实验对经济学家来说几乎毫无用处。然而当今,经济学实验已经发展成为经济研究     

基于专利挖掘的感知人工智能技术融合趋势分析

对于新兴产业而言,把握产业技术融合现状对于引导产业发展、加强技术创新具有非常重要的意义。人工智能技术与其它技术融合是促进产业创新发展的主要内在动力,因此对技术融合趋势进行分析有利于提前、准确把握该产业技术发展方向。聚焦感知人工智能领域,率先采用专利分析方法对10 685项专利数据进行挖掘,结合ISI技术分类体系,基于技术共现次数及关联度识别感知人工智能融合核心技术,并从核心技术融合的分散度及专利增长量等方面考察感知人工智能技术融合情况。研究发现,目前感知人工智能技术融合正处在成长期向成熟期过渡的阶段,并很快进入技术融合衰退期,建议政府及投资者积极布局现有感知人工智能主导技术,以期在即将到来的技术融合成熟期掌握主动权。同时,应大力推广“感知人工智能+”模式,提升该领域技术融合动力,延缓融合衰退期的到来。     

演化经济学——无序态及其整合

20世纪80年代以来演化经济学取得了长足进展,但由于缺少统一的基础性分析框架、对关键性概念的不同理解,演化经济学总体上仍处于一种无序态。要避免这种无序态,演化经济学须在层级区分、层级融合与核心理论构建上取得实质性进展,演化经济学的方法论决定了这种整合将是一个长期的过程,它不仅有赖于演化经济学本身的发展,还依赖于其他相关学科的进展。     

Some New Approaches to Evolutionary Economics

This paper examines the relationship between energy production and economic growth in New Mexico using cross section data for the state's 33 counties in Census years 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000. The central question is whether or not New Mexico's counties are subject to the resource curse, a phenomenon documented frequently in the literature. Most empirical studies of the resource curse hypothesis have used national or state level data and a broad definition of natural resources. In contrast, this analysis uses county level data with a focus on oil and gas extraction. The estimated models suggest that oil and gas extraction in New Mexico counties has had a small but positive effect on income, employment and population. Similar results were obtained when the model was estimated for 925 counties in 13 energy producing states for the year 2000.     

制度变迁理论的比较与综合--新制度经济学与马克思主义经济学的视角

从经济人和社会人的基本假设、方法论和制度变迁动力与方式异同的角度,对新制度经济学和马克思主义经济学的制度变迁理论进行比较分析和综合,得出以下结论:可以坚持经济人基本假设,将经济理性看作是个人学习与外部环境的互动来考察,将文化、伦理、社会性等作为结构和环境等制约因素,引入到对经济人的分析中;诺斯和马克思理论中的制度变迁动力说,都表达了对学习和知识存量的重视;两种制度变迁动力说,各有其适应的层次和范围;自然禀赋等非制度因素对制度变迁的影响不可忽视。     

马克思经济学与演化经济学制度变迁分析框架的比较研究

马克思经济学的"生产力——经济结构(生产方式——生产关系)——上层建筑"制度变迁分析框架和演化经济学的"心智——制度演化(遗传——变异——选择)"制度变迁分析框架具有根本性区别,但它们也有相通点。因此,应通过借鉴和吸收演化经济学制度变迁分析框架的合理成分,坚持和创新马克思主义经济学制度变迁分析框架的内容。     

Social Economics and Evolutionary Learning

The major premise of this paper is that social and individual well-being depends significantly on people's capacity to learn and unlearn in communication with each other. This paper builds on social economic traditions that see communication and conversation as evolutionary generative and adaptive mechanisms through which individual and social learning occurs. Drawing on educational psychology and organizational behavior scholarship, five dynamic processes of conversational learning are introduced with the contention that they can help social economists understand at a micro level more deeply and more concretely how learning happens in the give-and-take of conversation. The paper explores the role of the state, organizations, and communities in fostering individual freedom and dignity, human rights, and economic democracy and concludes that the investment of value in people and their capability for purposeful action as social economic stakeholders can be enhanced through conversation as learning.     

Social Economics and Evolutionary Institutionalism Today

This paper discusses theoretical and methodological elements that constitute social economics. It also considers those elements for evolutionary (Veblenian) institutional economics. It investigates how these “heterodoxies” may further converge. Such convergence would probably not trigger a complete unification, but lead to a broadly defined common research program and a strategy for joint “heterodox” survival, in face of the ranking game of the neoclassical “mainstream” and of the dominant powers supporting it as the discipline providing ideological legitimization. A common denominator of “heterodoxies” in terms of real-world orientation, direct interdependency and interaction of agents (social decision situations), appropriate complexity, and the treatment of values is drafted. Theoretical concepts discussed include complex and open systems, individual agency, institutions, embeddedness, networks, social reform, and process orientation. Formal methodological developments considered are complex modeling, game theory, or computer simulations. We arrive at a more formal common basis, which we term socio-economics. We also consider the relations of evolution and institutions, the institutional dichotomy, and the theory of institutional change. The monism of the “market” of the “mainstream” turns out to dissolve into the institutional diversity of real-world network forms, which helps explaining real-world forms of markets, hierarchies, or spatial clusters. Focuses of “heterodox” convergence will have to be the related “microfoundations” and “macrofoundations” projects, integrating an interdisciplinary “naturalistic” approach to genetic-cultural co-evolution of cooperation, and social reform. While modern socio-economics makes “heterodoxies” leading in economic research, their future still appears open between ideological cleansing and extinction through the mainstream, and proactive paradigmatic pluralism.