数学文化——鉴证世界的力量

文章从几个方面阐述了数学作为整个人类文化的一个有机组成成分的重要性，并进一步强调了创新是数学文化发展的强大动力。     

马克思主义计划经济论的道德意蕴与实践悖论

被马克思主义经典作家寄予极高道德期望的“计划经济”．因被误解误用而使社会主义道德建设付出代价,造成崇高的道德理想与经济社会发展状况之间、道德的人性预设与人的物质存在之间、先进的政治理念与官僚主义极权现实之间的重大落差。重新思考计划经济的道德代价得到如下启示：先进的理论不能脱离现实的实践．不能不顾现实任意修订或者恶意篡改理论;不能放弃计划经济理念的道德理想意蕴,应充分发挥“计划”要素在市场经济中的引导作用;要借助于经济体制的完美设计,而不是用政治意识形态的理想化宣传来解决道德问题。     

走出"血色樊篱"--对"女性文学"概念界说的质疑

通过对20世纪特别是90年代以来学术界关于"女性文学"这一概念内涵理解及界说的大致梳理,重点对90年代该概念内涵的界说所存在的悖论提出质疑,从而提出界定一部(或一篇)文学作品是否属于"女性文学",主要应以作品内涵而不是以作者性别为依据.     

出口和生产率:基于异质性企业的实证研究综述

新新贸易理论框架下异质性企业出口和生产率的关系可以用两种假说来概括——"自我选择出口"和"出口导致增长"。文章回顾了十多年来学者们用各个国家的企业数据对这两种假说的验证,对比和评析了相关的研究方法、研究结论、实证结果的原因等,对我国出口企业"生产率悖论"的原因进行总结与探讨,并提出了未来的研究思路与方向。     

中国出口企业“生产率悖论”存在性检验——来自2005～2008年中国制造业企业的证据

在异质性企业贸易理论提出后,对中国企业生产率的计算认为中国存在出口企业的生产率悖论,即出口企业的生产率比非出口企业的生产率要低。但是测算只是运用了求企业生产率的平均值的方法,这不能反映出口企业与非出口企业的生产率整体状况。文章使用2005～2008年中国制造业企业数据,运用总量法和均值法分行业、分地区计算并比较出口企业与非出口企业的生产率,从而检验中国出口企业生产率悖论的存在性。最后实证检验生产率与企业出口规模的相关性,结论显示生产率与企业出口是负相关的,这也是一种检验生产率悖论存在性的方法。     

Coalition-enhancing fiscal policies in an open economy: A CES framework of Gale’s transfer paradox

The motivation of our paper comes from David Gale’s seminal work in 1974. He constructed an example of the “transfer paradox” based on three Leontief functions. The transfer paradox is that when there is a set of agents in the home country and that the home country is trading with other countries, then certain public lump-sum tax transfer plans could make all agents in the home country better off. Our contributions are as follows. First, we show that such an example can be constructed with three smooth CES utility functions. Second, we establish the three crucial conditions for the existence of the transfer paradox: (1) the donor (a taxpayer) has stronger preference for the foreign good than the recipient; (2) the donor is ex-ante wealthier than the recipient; (3) the elasticity of substitution of the foreign country’s preference is strictly less than one.     

Harmonic sequence paradox

Summary. Informal evidence suggests that individuals are willing to pay only a finite and, typically, very low price for a specific lottery that converges to an infinite payment with probability one. The established decision theories (expected value, expected utility theory, cumulative prospect theory) cannot satisfactorily explain this low willingness to pay. The presented paradox strengthens the original and the super St. Petersburg paradox.Received: 27 Spetember 2004, Revised: 15 January 2005, JEL Classification Numbers: C91, D81.I am grateful to Peter Wakker, whose suggestions helped to simplify significantly the exposition of the main idea, and to the participants of a brown-bag seminar at CERGE-EI (June 23, 2004, Prague), notably Dirk Engelmann and Andreas Ortmann, who suggested interesting testable explanations for the paradox.