中日经济关系在东亚经济发展中的地位与作用

中日经济关系在东亚经济发展中的地位与作用李晓一８０年代以来，东亚地区以其经济的迅猛增长，成为世界经济发展的重要推动力量。中国和日本作为东亚地区的两个大国，其双边经济关系的发展在东亚经济发展中具有举足轻重的地位和作用。我们通过对现阶段中日两国在东亚经济...     

日本企业的经营战略与东亚国际货流的发展

70年代以后日本企业对东亚地区投资的增长，促进了东亚地区的经济发展，同时也带动了东亚国际货流的发展，东亚国际货流的发展确保了东亚地区国际贸易增长的需要。     

东亚跨国并购分析和启示

本文主要分析了东亚地区跨国并购总的趋势、行业分布和跨国并购对该地区经济的影响，并比较了东亚内部各国和地区跨国并购的状况。本文认为东亚跨国并购呈增长趋势，跨国出售大于收购，这满足了东亚地区对资金、技术和提升企业治理的需求，对高速发展的东亚地区来说是很重要的，特别对中国大陆和韩国更是如此，但是仍存在许多需要防备的风险。     

京津需要“一带两城”

世界经济发展的中心正在向亚太地区转移，亚太地区各国也正以巨人的步伐来迎接二十一世纪的挑战，这是世界经济发展的大格局。在世界经济发展大格局中，东亚在亚太地区占有举足轻重的一席。日本是一个经济强国、在近两年经济停滞后，今年已有复苏的苗头。韩国三十多年来经济持续高速增长。中国环渤海地区改革开放匕年来，经济也有长足的发展。1993年．中国政府又把这个地区作为经济发展的重声、．得到了议事日【上来。纵观东亚地区经济发展。令＼鼓舞和欣慰。天津经济发展会是一个什么格局7或者说。天津如何优化自己的格局呢，第一，天津是…     

日本与东亚地区经济关系的新变化

日本与东亚地区经济关系的新变化南开大学国际商学院陈岩，万谊青进入９０年代，日本和东亚地区的经济关系发生了新的变化。对此，本文拟从日本和东亚地区的分工、投资、贸易三个方面来进行初步的探讨。日本与东亚分工的新变化日本与东亚地区的分工以前是雁行形态的垂直分...     

东亚经济一体化与中国的战略选择

中国的改革开放改变了东亚乃至世界经贸投资增长的格局,20多年来,东亚各经济体积极把握中国改革开放的契机,努力发展对华直接投资、国际贸易和技术转移,使东亚地区经济焕发出勃勃生机。随着经济区域化势头的方兴未艾,东亚经济迈向一体化的呼声日益高涨,有关国家和地区已开始了实质行动。中国是东亚举足轻重的大国,中国的战略选择将决定着东亚经济一体化的走向,深刻影响着未来东亚经济的整体繁荣。     

东亚区域货币一体化的可行性及其前景研究

区域货币一体化是区域性经济组织为开展区域性金融合作与协调、促进地区经济发展的一种适应性选择。东亚地区货币合作是亚洲地区经济发展的内在要求。本文基于最 优货币区理论,对建立东亚货币一体化的可行性进行了分析,并且对其发展前景进行了展望。     

日本经济复苏中的东亚因素

近年,日本经济显现复苏迹象。一般认为,对东亚出口增加是带动经济复苏的牵引力之一。本文通过分析日本与东亚国家和地区间贸易格局的新特点,阐述东亚因素促进日本经济增长的原因,说明互利情况下,日本在东亚地区经济发展中应发挥的作用。     

“新地区主义”:东亚经济发展模式的新要素

随着全球经济环境的不断变化 ,东亚经济发展模式 (EastAsianDevelop mentModel,EADM)面临着巨大挑战 ,东亚经济体的长远发展要求推动EADM的变革 ,提升国际竞争力 ,实现均衡的增长 ,东亚“新地区主义”的兴起正是东亚经济体对此变革要求的积极回应。     

东亚模式与中国

东亚(日本及东亚"四小龙":韩国、中国台湾、中国香港和新加坡)在战后取得的奇迹般的经济发展,无疑是20世纪经济增长史上最重大的事件之一.美国著名经济学家斯蒂格利茨(Stiglitz,1997)将东亚的成功列为战后三个最重大的深刻地影响了人们关于发展的思维的事件之一(其它两个事件分别是前苏联的崩溃及全球经济一体化).关于东亚经济发展的评价,人们业已取得的两点基本共识是:第一,存在着某些共同的东亚经验(东亚模式);第二,东亚经验(东亚模式)代表着一种成功的发展经验(发展模式).然而,如我们在有关东亚经验研究的大量文献中可以看到的,在一些基本的问题上仍存在着严重的混淆和分歧,包括东亚模式涵盖的国家/地区范围,东亚模式的确切内涵,对东亚模式与东亚的成功之间的因果关系的解释,等等.     

The Role of Education in Economic Growth in East Asia: a survey

This paper surveys the literature on the links between education and economic growth in East Asia. It finds that education is important for economic growth but it is not a sufficient condition. The complementarity between education and other factors in enhancing productivity and efficiency is commonly seen as the driving force of economic growth. However, the empirical evidence is ambiguous due to econometric problems. Statistical analysis suggests that education and economic growth in East Asia have two-way causality. Nevertheless, valuing education has been a widely-accepted part of Asian values. As a result, education consistently presents as a significant income determinant and consequentially a growth factor, regardless of whether education can increase productivity. East Asian education systems are also formed and extended in close relation to the stages of their economic development: the higher the level of economic development, the greater the demand for better and higher education systems.     

Prospects for East Asian economic regionalism in the 21st century

It is not likely that East Asian states will regress to the mercantilist developmental state that used to engineer compressed economic growth. However, it is evident that the pattern of transformation East Asian states are undergoing, is not analogous to the path of Anglo‐American development Although the government refrains itself from arbitrarily supplying economic resources (especially financial resources in the form of subsidies or policy loans) to promote strategic industries, it does not give up commanding the market to attain a relatively higher economic growth. The relationship between the state and the market is still set up in a hierarchical fashion in favor of the former. The economic system to emerge in East Asia is the state‐governed rather than market‐centered, even if it has absorbed neo‐liberal condiments. The state‐dominant economic system of East Asia is expected to survive for a considerable period. In this regard, the establishment of a financial system to sustain the East Asian economic system has been strongly suggested. Here lies in the reason we discuss the rise of the East Asian economic identity in the post‐financial crisis era.     

An East Asian paradigm?

The World Bank's 1993 East Asian Miracle report proposed two models of East Asian Development, one based on the Japanese economy, the other on the more recent miracle economies of Southeast Asia. The latter pursued open-market and investment policies compatible with Anglo-American economic norms, while Japan and its coterie (South Korea and Taiwan) forged industrial policy regimes with high levels of government intervention and protection. Japan takes a different view of Southeast Asian success—as a combination of conscious emulation of Japan and concentrated Japanese foreign direct investment, aid, and regional industrial strategy. This article explores the tension between the World Bank thesis and the Japanese view, embodied in a growth metaphor called flying geese. The author concludes that Japan has been far more reactive and opportunistic than the flying geese metaphor suggests, but that this paradigm has a profound influence on Japanese government and corporate strategy in Asia.     

东亚区域合作新态势及中国的战略调整

1997年东南亚金融危机使东亚各国认识到域内合作的重要性,东亚区域合作蓬勃发展。十年之后的美国次贷危机演变成全球金融危机,客观上推动东亚区域合作呈现出了一些新态势。与此同时,鉴于中国及东亚各国当前面临的发展问题,东亚区域合作应在遵循东盟主导的基础上开拓互联互通务实合作,增强区域凝聚力和内生发展动力,提升合作的机制化水平,实现区域内经济的可持续发展。     

A search for robust East Asian development models after the financial crisis: mutual learning from East Asian experiences

The purpose of this paper is to search for new robust East Asian economic development models following the financial crisis. Specifically, this paper addresses both robustness and sustainability of Korea’s Chaebol-led model, Taiwan’s SMEs-led model, and Malaysia’s FDI-led model, respectively. East Asia’s new development paradigm can be reformulated not only by adopting and learning advanced financial innovations of global standards in the framework of Gershenkron’s “advantages of backwardness,” but also in the concept of “mutual learning” from both strengths and weaknesses of development models of the three countries. East Asia has neglected too long some inherent wisdoms that are contained in its “miracle models,” yet it shows that their different paths to development may lead to a positive policy convergence.     

中国在东亚经济一体化进程中的战略选择

20世纪90年代以来,世界经济的发展出现了新的趋势:区域经济一体化的发展较为迅猛。资源突破国界限制在世界范围内来实现优化配置,各国、各地区经济的相互依存程度不断提高。近些年来,东亚经济合作有了一定的发展,但是和欧盟及北美自由贸易区比起来,东亚经济一体化的发展明显落后。本文以区域经济一体化理论为基础,对中国在东亚经济一体化进程中的战略进行了研究,指出了中国在东亚经济一体化进程中战略存在的问题,并对中国的一体化战略提出了几点建议。     

东亚与欧盟区域的产品需求结构与贸易模式

东亚和欧盟分别表现为外需主导型和内需主导型的贸易模式。两种不同的贸易模式对经济发展产生着不同的影响。由于东亚区域对外部最终产品市场的严重依赖,所以,后危机时代下,东亚贸易模式转型的必要性更加明显。但是,东亚贸易模式的转型将是一个长期的过程,而中国将在这个过程中发挥重要的作用。     

东亚货币合作的现状分析及中国的战略选择

经济全球化和区域经济一体化的世界经济趋势对东亚货币合作提出了迫切要求,东亚国家在金融领域暴露出的金融体系脆弱性要求加强东亚货币合作。鉴于亚洲地区政治经化的复杂性和差异性,整个亚洲的金融合作条件远未成熟,但东亚地区的经济往来密切,具备了一定的基础。本文对东亚货币合作的现状和未来可能的路径和前景进行分析,并对中国的参与提出建议。     

East and South Asia: Managing Difficult Bilateral Relations and Regional Integration Globally

This paper analyzes the economic integration of the East and South Asian economies in the global economy. East Asian economies are shown to be achieving much more of their potential trade than South Asian economies, both in terms of intra‐regional trade and in trade with the rest of the world. Examination of the China–Japan, India–Pakistan and Taiwan–mainland China bilateral relationships shows that integration of these economies into the global economy has allowed economic relations to dominate and constrain difficult bilateral political relations in East Asia while in South Asia adverse political relations have hampered development of bilateral economic relationships.     

东亚金融一体化的动态及其收益

近年来，东亚一系列区域金融合作引起了学术界对地区金融一体化现状和收益的极大兴趣。文章基于价格和数量的测度考察了东亚地区金融一体化的程度：抛补利差和股权溢价的β收敛结果表明，危机之前东亚金融市场的全球和区域一体化并行，但在近几年，区域一体化趋势更强劲，超过了全球一体化；金融引力模型的结果表明，东亚主要的跨境金融投资者的区域内金融资产持有量比金融引力模型预测的水平更大。此外，面板回归确定了较高的金融一体化作为更广泛的金融发展的关键组成部分，会显著降低东亚国家对发达国家的经常账户失衡，因此，区域层面的金融一体化可以作为加强东亚国家的增长来源和提高经济弹性的重要政策路径。