摘要
以比较优势理论为基础的国际贸易纯理论经历了三个不同发展阶段,即传统贸易理论、新贸易理论到新新贸易理论。不同的理论基于不同的假定前提,传统贸易理论模型建立在一系列的严格假定之上,新贸易理论将部分假定予以放松,讨论的是在规模收益递增和不完全竞争市场条件下的产业内贸易,而新新贸易理论则是将假定条件进一步放松,研究的是在贸易成本不为零的条件下的产业间贸易和产业内贸易,尤其是在出现外包情况下的产业内贸易的福利效应。显然,国际贸易理论的不断发展使贸易模型对现实世界的描述呈现逐渐逼近的过程。
然而,国际贸易理论的研究始终存在着一个无法逾越的鸿沟,那就是贸易的实物面研究(即贸易纯理论)和贸易的货币面研究(即国际货币理论)仍然是两个平行发展、相互没有联系的独立部分。作为国家间开展贸易不可缺少的交换媒介——不同货币之间比价的汇率,无法作为一个变量纳入到国际贸易模型中。尽管在过去的几十年,国际经济学家都在致力于寻找两者间的趋同点,但至今尚未取得令人满意的研究进展。要想跨越横亘在两个学科中的理论隔断不仅需要建立两个学科的联系,更重要的是要有全新的方法论与新的理论框架。因此,建立一个包含贸易实物面和货币面的统一的理论框架至关重要。本文的研究目的就是通过一种理论构造的方式,自洽地把汇率纳入国际贸易理论框架,使其成为一个系统变量。
本文的研究任务在于通过研究贸易、汇率与国家竞争力之间的关系,将国家竞争战略作为一种无形的要素禀赋放进传统的贸易模型中,并为国家竞争战略提供政治经济学分析框架。
本文基于战略管理的结构学派观点,把国家竞争战略看作是具体的经济系统的结构转变过程。首先从国际贸易的实物面开始,讨论两个开放经济系统所产生的冲突及其原因,再将理论分析扩展到国际贸易的货币面,把汇率系统作为国家竞争战略的工具,从系统冲突到系统修正两种机制角度,阐明了作为国家竞争战略工具的汇率系统实现非均衡稳定的基本条件。
本项研究的外部经济环境界定为贸易自由化。贸易自由化不是自由贸易,贸易自由化是经济全球化的产物,是逐步降低关税的一种过程,在这样的过程中,全球经济增长方式产生了变化,导致了生产范式的改变和国际分工新格局的出现,这样界定的直接理论效应是,贸易产生了多重均衡。
本文从两国多商品的贸易形态入手,证明了两国由于保留产业的存在而产生的多重均衡,导致了两国间的贸易不再是双赢的结果,国际贸易引发的国家间利益冲突,形成了零和结构。国家利益冲突促使贸易各国通过制定和执行国家竞争战略以获得国家利益最大化。
在H—O理论框架的基础上,通过将要素禀赋概念进行拓展,有形要素禀赋扩展到无形要素禀赋。再将国家竞争战略视为一种无形要素禀赋,汇率作为国家竞争战略的工具,则经常以汇率作为国家竞争战略的国家,具有比较优势,可以比有形要素禀赋丰裕的国家获得包括国际铸币税在内的更多的要素报酬。这样的理论处理就把国际贸易的货币面研究和实物面研究在新的理论框架下统一起来,汇率成为了贸易系统的内生变量。
显然,汇率作为在国际市场失灵情况下国家的一种战略工具,仅仅是国家行为的一种表象,而它所蕴含的经济学内涵却比传统的汇率理论的内容丰富得多。汇率的本性是偏离均衡状态的,一国政府就是利用这种偏离,将汇率作为国家竞争战略的工具,用以实现其战略目标。因此无论是汇率行为本身,还是它与其它经济变量之间的关系都是非线性的,同时因为汇率对不同产业的贸易条件的变动具有不同的绩效,因此它还具有非中性的性质。这种具有非中性、非线性和非均衡性的汇率系统是一种复杂性系统,在这个意义下的汇率其实就是一种“策略”汇率。
本文构建了策略汇率的政治经济学模型。模型展示的结论表明,策略汇率不仅是本国国内利益集团博弈的结果,而且又是本国政府与其贸易伙伴国政府博弈的结果。
策略汇率作为国家竞争战略是经济周期的相机变量,而且还是抵御系统性风险的有效战略。
本文以中国为个案研究对象,通过中国国家竞争战略从对外贸易战略到汇率战略的演化过程,说明汇率作为国家竞争战略不仅是中国在全球化中的理性选择,而且还是中国能否最终成为金融强国的关键因素。
国家竞争战略在某种条件下可以形成国家竞争优势。波特从国与国之间的产业层面进行比较分析,提出钻石结构模型阐述了一个产业在国际市场中竞争优势的形成。但波特的方法不是标准的经济分析的方法。本项研究从国家层面上沿用经济系统分析的理论方法,选择国际竞争力水平的最好综合反映的经济系统变量——汇率,作为国家竞争战略的工具,阐明了汇率系统的理性国家决策(安排)在什么条件下形成国家竞争优势。这有利于保持国际贸易理论从亚当·斯密(分工产生绝对优势)、李嘉图(交易产生比较优势)到赫克歇尔—欧林(要素禀赋决定贸易形态)的分析传统。在此,本文完成了把波特的竞争战略形态形成竞争优势的思想纳入到国际贸易理论框架下,汇率战略视为理性国家行为函数的变量,寻找形成国家竞争优势的系统条件,以达成最大的福利和稳定的研究任务。
在论文的结构安排上,本文采取系统演化方法,即按照理论(理论就是一个系统)演化的自然(或历史)过程安排论文的篇章结构。本文从结构上可以分为两大部分,即理论系统和事实系统,其中理论系统由理论进化(第1-4章)和理论发展(第5-9章)构成。事实系统(第10-12章)则是以中国作为国别研究的个案,以其国家竞争战略的形成过程,为理论系统提供一个检验的实例。这样一来,给定理论研究的初始条件(对国家竞争战略作政治经济学分析),寻找理论研究的源头(①贸易纯理论及其潜在的研究价值分析;②波特的竞争战略及其潜在的研究价值分析)与对现实问题的理论抽象(全球化中国家竞争战略的确定),然后将理论研究的源头与现实问题的理论抽象汇合,形成新的理论学说(无形要素禀赋假说)。再进一步拓广理论边界(贸易的实物面拓广到贸易的货币面----汇率),遵循逻辑的轨迹,从战略维角度重新审视汇率的基本假设(挖掘出非中性的内涵)最终导出全新的理论结果(非中性的汇率决定成为国家竞争战略的工具),并与前面的分析与抽象相对应,形成螺旋式上升的呼应。然后用一个事实的系统对理论系统构成镜像(中国国家竞争战略的案例分析)。
第一章,笔者开门见山阐明本文的研究倾向,在新古典的福利经济分析与政治经济学分析之间,尤其偏爱后者,特别是新政治经济学的分析方法。一个社会中政治如何影响经济选择,最理想的研究对象就是国家行为了。新政治经济学是运用现代经济分析的规范技术工具来考察政治行为对经济决策过程以及经济结果的影响,它不仅运用了现代经济分析的常用数学方法,还运用了诸如激励和约束等概念来考察政治现象。
第二章,对国际贸易理论的发展演化作了归纳性评论,为理论创新寻找突破点;第三章,设定行为假设。把国际贸易理论模型由小国假设变为大国假设时,经济中就出现了保留产业、多重均衡与国家利益冲突。同时具体分析了美日贸易摩擦的原因、形式与本质;第四章,研究国际竞争力、比较优势与竞争优势之间的区别与联系,对波特的竞争战略理论进行批评式的回顾,认为波特研究的是产业层次的竞争战略而不是真正意义下的国家层次的竞争战略;
第一章到第四章是理论进化部分。第五章到第九章是理论发展部分,而且是本文的主体。在第五章,阐述全球化中贸易自由化与经济增长所带引的流动性、生产范式、贸易形态的变化,使得国家竞争战略必然成为贸易各国的策略选择;第六章,讨论由于全球化的出现使得要素禀赋的外延扩展,从有形要素禀赋扩展到无形要素禀赋。国家竞争战略作为无形要素禀赋对国际贸易理论框架的创新。无形要素禀赋假说已经得到了事实系统的支持;第七章,研究汇率的基本性质。在传统的分析中,当汇率作为政策目标时,呈现中性;当汇率作为政策工具时,则表现为非中性特征。在资本完全流动的条件下,三位一体不兼容;在资本不完全流动的条件下,三位一体兼容。所以在汇率中性时,国家竞争战略可以实施的基本条件,就是在资本不完全流动的情况下,三位一体不兼容。即汇率作为政策目标时,国家竞争战略也有实施的可能;第八章,研究非中性汇率----策略汇率。当汇率作为国家竞争战略工具时,就是策略汇率。策略汇率使得我们可以在更大的理论范围里使用国家竞争战略来研究问题。例如,我们不但可以研究策略汇率的福利效应,也可以讨论策略汇率的政治经济学问题。本章构造了一个政治经济学模型,详细阐明了国家竞争战略是如何决定的。在第九章,研究国家竞争战略与经济周期的关系,当经济繁荣时,对于核心经济体而言可以采用强势货币的国家竞争战略强化竞争优势,当经济萧条时,则采用弱势货币的竞争战略强化竞争优势。当出现金融系统性风险时,汇率战略是最优的风险管理工具。
本文的最后部分是关于事实系统的实证研究,以中国为对象,研究中国国家战略的形成过程,作为理论系统的镜像。第十章,回顾中国成功实施从进口替代战略,出口导向战略到追赶战略,最终实现贸易大国之梦的历程;第十一章,研究中国国家竞争战略从贸易战略向汇率战略转型的理论问题与现实困难,机遇与挑战。建立灵活的人民币汇率机制是转型成功的标志;第十二章,研究中国成为金融强国的国家竞争战略是什么样的战略,如何制定这样的战略,所制定的战略的可行性以及如何执行这样的国家竞争战略。但这更多是一种对未来的构想,而不是现实,这需要智慧、想象力与国家集体行动。
Traditionally, international economics has been split two sections: international trade theory—which focuses on the pattern of trade and gains from trade etc, the micro economics in international arena, and international finance theory----which focuses on international monetary system and exchange rate regime etc, the macro economics in international arena. The gap obviously exists which implies it is necessary to find the linkage to shrink the gap and international economists have strived substantial convergence in the past decades. Unfortunately, it seems no one has made the distinct progress yet. Overcoming the split require changes not only on both sides, but also methodologies. It is crucial to develop a new framework which can accommodate both areas of international economics as well as new philosophy on methodologies.
It is helpful to trace back the main stream of traditional trade theory when new framework is expected to built. Ricardo’s comparative advantage theory has been regarded as a cornerstone of traditional classical and neoclassical international trade theories in the past two centuries, which states that international trade can benefit all nations simultaneously because specialization allows total global production volume to increase, due to the efficient allocation of resources.
Apparently, Ricardo’s theory highlights that comparative advantage arises from difference of productivity. Heckscher and Ohlin took a large step further by exploring what happened if two nations have the same production function, e.g. comparative advantage no longer comes from different productivity; it arises from difference in national factor endowments. Thus, the H-O factor proportions theory derives the determinants of comparative advantage in a world of‘two-ness’(two goods, two factors, two countries) and the assumption of perfect competition. The goal of H-O theory is to analyze mobility in the sense of flows of goods and immobility of factors makes sure the existence of differences of factors’prices The New Trade Theory stresses product differentiation and increasing returns to the list of determinants of trade patterns, they are not adequate either. Because it emphasis the similarities, rather than difference on the explanation of determinants of trade patterns, and it relies almost completely on monopolistic competition to explain intra-industry trade, which may lead to develop the“two-ness”trade model, and the national conflicting interests can be emerged arising from retainable industry and multi-equilibriums due to increasing returns and externality.
Retainable industry is regarded as a one source of multi-equilibrium in international trade. Retainable industry refers to an industry with highly starting-up cost and it is difficult to entry without large scale, expertise, skills and experiences. Retainable industry shows lock-in effect of the country’s comparative advantages, which suggests the industry sustaining competitiveness, coming from know-how, expertise on the market, experience, learning by doing technique etc.
Another extremely case of retainable industry occurs in the industry with very short product life cycle. The advanced countries can keep their first mover advantages in such so call retainable industry even though their trade partners’wealthy has improved by offering intermediate products to advanced countries.
The trend of globalization in the past decades brings about revolutionary change in global production. Outsourcing, supply chain management, and other sort of new style of production increase the volume of international trade and change production pattern and trade pattern dramatically. Global value chain shows each country position in the process of value chain creation, which determines the pattern of international trade.
In other words, current pattern of trade may lead to the situation that the retainable industry in developed countries has state-of–art technology, whereas the retainable industry in developing countries has technology exported from developed countries.
This could be a long process until its trade partners’exports reach some point in global market by increasing marketing share, which implies developing countries becomes disadvantages of developed countries, or in shortly, some industries in developing countries have strong competitiveness in global market, or low cost exports from developing countries induce deflation in advanced countries, then mutual-beneficial trade for trade partner has involved to the conflicting interests of nation.
Two types of economic growth patterns have co-existed and advanced countries’endogenous growth pattern represents the core economy’s pattern and the developing countries represent the non-core economy pattern respectively, and the pattern has changed global trade pattern profoundly.
Obviously, traditional neo-classical international trade theory, either Ricardo comparative advantage theory, or H-O factor endowment model, cannot draw a picture closely related to real world reality. Three reasons may be provided to explain the drawbacks of comparative advantage. First, comparative advantage is a microeconomic concept, which emphases on industry-specific trade, and it has little significance from macroeconomic perspective. Second, comparative advantage is an equilibrium concept and it cannot describe multi-equilibrium which reflects business decisions, favorable exchange rate and other economic conditions. Third it does not take explicitly into account the technological options available to firms. It is necessary for further research to develop a new concept in international trade theory. Competitiveness, a widely used term in business administration literature, and closely related concept, competitive advantage has been embedded in literature by Porter.The Competitive Advantage of Nations focus on industry level and it is formed as a diamond by factor endowments, domestic demand condition, supported and related industry, strategy, and structure as well as rivalry competition. Moreover, government policy and chance are also very important for attaining successful competitive advantages.
Unfortunately, some economists have either ignored the concept of competitive advantage, or dismissed it as merely a restatement of comparative advantage. Porter’s approach to explore competitive advantage is not a traditional economic methodology. It is case-study approach, which is popular on business administration, highlighting on the way which factor productivity and firm competition interact. The simplicity of the case-study approach shows less rigorous, comparing with traditional strict demonstration process. So it is necessary to develop a theoretical framework which can encompass neo-classical methodology with the new concept of international competitiveness or competitive advantage by Porter’s term.
International competitiveness typically refers to a time of disequilibrium when a country can increase its share of export markets. It is a matter first of low costs, which depend on exchange rate, domestic wages and material costs and productivity, transportation and communication costs, trade barriers and trade strategy. It is a dynamic rather than static perspective. The concept combines both on macro and micro level. To some extent, international competitiveness is meant the ability of a country’s producer to command world markets; thereby it is highly related to competitive advantages,
What exactly is competitive advantage? And how does it relate to and interact with comparative advantage? One possible answer is that it is something to do with more competitive markets: simply a large number of firms may give an industry advantage in competing with foreign rivals. Another possible answer is that competitive advantage is just a synonym for absolute advantage: some natural or policy-induced superiority (such as lower taxes or greater labor market flexibility) which reduces costs for all home sectors.
Therefore, a country gains competitive advantage may reflect underlying factors and productivity consideration, which closely related to current exchange rate, undervaluation or overvaluation, product quality and specifications, tariffs and NTBs, as well as transaction costs of trade. This paper focus on how a favorable exchange rate increases a country competitive advantage.
Globalization, the most controversial and wildly recognized concept, has changed the world profoundly. To some extent, globalization spreads technology, weakens power of authoritarian governments, provides exposure to other cultures, etc. Furthermore, globalization offer consumers more choices and multinational corporations are creating jobs in less developed countries where people never before had such opportunities.
In international arena, globalization has increased both trade liberalization and financial deregulation, which both reward to the tremendous volumes of international trade and more mobility of international capital as well as the opening international markets between OECD members and emerging economies. Moreover, the financial deregulation impulses have positive effect on trade account. Diminishing non-traffic trade barriers and declined traffic are the fruits of trade liberalization; With non-trade barriers (NTBs) removed and tariff reduced, nations have recognized the limitation of employing tariff to protect domestic industries, and they have to seek other policy instruments as useful means of government interventions. It may leads to trade policy reform, which could meet the needs of trade liberalization to improve the efficiency by creating a transparent and neutral system of incentives that eliminate anti-export bias, direct impediments to trade, and economic distortions caused by the trade regime. Although only some countries undertook such program managed to reduce to some extent the degree of trade policy distortions in good practicing, most trade literature highlights the positive externalities derived from more competition in trade relations. Furthermore, free international trade contributes to national prosperity, which may increase national power and enhance security. On the other hand, it has the same effect on a nation’s trade partners, which could become a political or even military rival. The resulting ambivalent attitude is torn between the vision of state cooperating for economic gain and recognition that they also use trade to compete for political power.
Nations try to pursuing effective policy instruments to increase its export and gains from trade, meanwhile they also quest effective way to prevent trade that could be more beneficial to its trade partner. The perception reflects macroeconomic policies and nation’s distinct response to the interdependence in regional/ global integration.
Trade and macroeconomic policies (monetary policy, fiscal policy) are well known policy instruments for government, the linkage and the mutual functions between trade and macroeconomic policies, however, is less well known. A well designed and sequenced trade liberalization measure and delectated arranged trade rules can facilitate economic growth and development. But the extent of that contribution heavily depends on other policies.
So far, an international trade model has been extent to more complicate case this involves not only a barter trade, but also currency side, and the importance of exchange rate policy-making has been recognized by government, as a result, exchange rate fluctuation becomes a tool to deal with trade disputing.
In the past decades, especially after the breakdown of Breton Wood system, floating exchange rate system is implemented in most developed countries and this brings about to a large number of literatures focus on the relation of exchange rate movements and stability of trade policy, employment, productivity, income distribution, nation’s external wealth, economic growths, etc.
In an open economy, macroeconomic equilibrium has twofold balances: the first one is internal balance, which refers to output at full or near full employment, and related to domestic goods, financial and labor markets; and the second is external balance, which refers to terms of a sustainable current account balance and it’s financing. Therefore, the level of current account imbalance directly reflects the difference between national income and spending. Current account deficits can be made up by capital inflow, or by foreign reserves, etc. A nation with positive net external asset position enables it to run persistent trade deficits. In turn, all else equal, the capability to sustain a negative net export balance in equilibrium is associated with an appreciated real exchange rate. Conversely, a debtor nation which has to run trade surplus to reimburse its external liabilities can pursuit a more depreciated real exchange rate. Furthermore, the size of trade surplus, which a debtor country needs to refund its external liabilities, will depend on the rate of return it has to pay on these liabilities, as well as on its output growth rate, and exchange rate. And the real exchange rate. Thereby, most previous works focus on the exchange rate volatility and trade balance or export; others stress the real exchange rate play critical role in altering international competitiveness, which is fundamental factor of determining nation’s reorientation toward its trade partners.
As mentioned in the previous part, macroeconomic policies, such fiscal policies, monetary policies as well as exchange policies have been applied to attain the goal for one nation’s best interest. But a unified exchange rate system provides protection effect on firms profoundly different as firms operate with distinct cost of product; on the other hand, unified exchange rate system does not discriminate between domestic and foreign firms while traffic does. Therefore, firm which receive insufficient protection under the circumstance increase pressure for government protection by other policy instrument rather than existing exchange rate?
Therefore, a country gains competitive advantage may reflect underlying factors and productivity consideration, which closely related to current exchange rate, undervaluation or overvaluation, product quality and specifications, tariffs and NTBs, as well as transaction costs of trade. This paper focus on how a favorable exchange rate increases a country competitive advantage.
This dissertation focuses on the exchange rate and a nation’s competitive strategy which can accomplish national international competitiveness, and exchange rate is regarded as an instrument of national competitive strategy, which refers to a set of integrated and coordinated actions taken to enhance a nation’s competitive advantages. A unified exchange rate system has distinct effect on individual firms in a country, some may gain beneficial, and some could be damaged. Those groups, who do not gain from exchange rate may use its power to influence government policies; one the other hand, when government set it exchange parity it has to take several factors in consideration, export structure, its policy coherence and international cooperation, which may assist government to attain their objectives and gain economic efficiency and international competitiveness from international cooperation, especially in global economic integration.
It is well known there are so many indicators on exchange rate, such as equilibrium exchange rate, nominal exchange rate, real exchange rate and effective exchange rate, and their combinations, with respect exchange rate determination theories. With distinct definitions, economists choose different concept depending on their field and the content related to economic implications. For instance, nominal exchange rate is a proper indicator to study a high-frequency volatility exchange market which can show the dynamic change in international financial market when it is necessary to supervise capital movement, financial globalization; effective exchange rate is a useful tool to study a nation’s ability to command the rest of world in world market due to its reflecting a nation’s export/import weight change; and real exchange rate is popular to study PPP or Balassa-Samuelson effect when a country’s economic development is considered; and equilibrium exchange rate is more meaningful as a benchmark in theoretical study when a country’s economy internal and external equilibrium are taken into consideration.
A country’s economic development demonstrates its international competitiveness, it is reasonable to focus on the relationship between real exchange rate and economic development, which have been studied both from the positive (descriptive) and normative (policy prescription) perspective. Whether real exchange rate stability and proper exchange rate alignment are crucial factors to increase international competitiveness and improve economic performance? Can government manipulate exchange rate to achieve its economic prosperity? Even though evidence from developing countries is often quoted to support the view the link between the real exchange rate misalignment and economic performance is strong. Therefore, successful economic development generates a domestic currency appreciation with an improvement in the standard of living, whereas a failure in economic development results in sharp currency depreciation. It is important to assess the degree of misalignment as one evaluates the equilibrium real exchange rate, and one of the most important models on equilibrium real exchange analysis is well-known Balassa-Samuelson effect. Balassa-Samuelson effect states the real exchange rate level is positively correlated with development degree of the economy because of differential productivity growth between tradable and non-tradable commodities. The Balassa-Samuelson model provides a supply-side explanation for the relative price of tradable and non-tradable in an economy and assuming that PPP holds for traded goods, both for the differences in price levels of development and long-run behavior of CPI-deflated real exchange rate. To establish that the relative price of tradable and non-tradable, and thus the price level composed of tradable and non-tradable goods prices, is determined entirely by supply conditions, i.e. the production functions of an economy, several assumptions are needed
In other words, real exchange rate appreciation is associated with a country’s economic development. It is inevitable that domestic currency appreciates as its rapid economic growth. Previous research indicates favorable exchange rate is one of sources of competitiveness. What could be the strategic choice if a country is facing an inevitable exchange rate appreciation after its fast growth? Several strategies would be taken into consideration: stability (keeping the exchange rate unchanged), appreciation or depreciation, overvalued or undervalued, and any options can reflect the best interests of home country.
Hence, one feasible direction of research could be how a country manipulates its real exchange rate through the exchange rate misalignment as an effective mean to achieve its best interests among the nation’s interest conflict in international trade. This misalign exchange rate is defined as‘strategic exchange rate’referring its implication of government instrument perusing its strategic goal. Thus the strategic exchange rate is disequilibrium and non-linear, and government try to employ the misalignment to attain it strategic goal----perusing the best interests of the nation in the second-best circumstance.
Tinbergen’s Rule suggests that one instrument can only attain one macroeconomic goal. Mundell pointed out government and central bank can use fiscal policy and monetary policy for external balance and internal balance respectively. With free capital mobile, monetary policy can reach an external goal (e.g. exchange rate stability), or internal (domestic) goal (e.g. inflation rate). It is impossible for monetary policy to reach the external as well as internal goals simultaneously, and the statement has been referred as the famous“incompatible trinity”, which is on the basis of free capital mobility and fixed exchange rate regime (regarded as external balance goal). If, on the hand, the assumptions are shifted to uncompleted capital mobility, the“compatible trinity”can be established and exchange rate can be viewed as a instrument to accomplish external goal (especially in monetary zone which each member has to scarify its independent monetary policy). Even though the exchange rate has dual functions---policy goal and policy instrument, it is an effective tool for government implementing its national competitive strategy.
How can the government determine the strategic exchange rate? By employing New Political Economics method, this dissertation demonstrates two forces can determine the value of strategic exchange rate----one is the domestic interest groups and the other is foreign trade partners’pressures.
Interest group represents people pursuing the same or similar goal and interests establish groups, organizations etc, and try to attain favorable policy by lobbying. Different interest groups act as distinct benefits and each of them do its best to maximize its interests leading to conflicting among groups. Government decision-makers are lobbied by different interest groups in order to reward a favorable policy and more wealth of the groups.
In the last part of this dissertation, China’s experience is presented as a case of national competitive strategy evolutionary process.
After 15 year-long quest, China became the 143rd member of WTO on 11 December 2001. WTO accession means for China a curial step forward in its unprecedented strategy to catch up with the advanced industrial world by means of market socialism. The future of China’s modernization is dependent on the reactions of the rest of the world to China’s economic growth. Since committed to WTO, China has reduced a large portion of its import tax in the past years, but are still suffed some unexpected trouble—antidumping allegation, which is mainly an excuse to force China appreciating its currency. Thus, one lively and concentrated research area in international economics has accompanied the process of appreciating Chinese currency, Renminbi (RMB). Is this process appropriate and reflects the relality of China economy ascending? If the answers for these questions are positive then the adjustment process of RMB indicates the trend of PPP, which is reasonable and implying the equilibrium may be reached in the future, so there is no necessary to use government policy interventions. If the appreciation of RMB suggests the pressures aroused from China trade counterparts, especially from USA, which indicates the adjustment process may not solve the misalignment of exchange rate, and even may enhance the misalignment because of the international competitive strategic decisions by Chinese trade counterparts, which may improve their national competitiveness in world market. The appreciating process of RMB, probably, implies both causes discussed above. Under the circumstance, exchange rate plays a prominent role as an instrument for countries to winning in international competition.
From inception, undervalue domestic currency is regarded as an effective instrument to increase exports by China’s government and some business. This may leads to expand foreign exchange reserves by trade surplus, which is considered as beneficial for a country safeguard, especially for Chinese government, who witness the financial crises in Southeast Asia in 1998 and deem such disaster as their big concern because the Asian financial crisis reveal the weakness in the Asian development model which China had been partly pursuing. Furthermore, unlike economic reforms implemented in Europe, East Europe or Latin American, China’s strategy has been unique. It borrowed from its high—growth Asian neighbors for its development, it, however, had no grand design and it is not easy to categorized its policies neatly into standard development framework. This may lead to difficulties for China to evaluate the consequence of its exchange rate system reform due to the unique pattern of economic transformation. By the same token, China has been persisting to peg its currency RMB to US Dollars, which was depreciated since the 911 terrorism attack America, as a result, increasing trade disputes arise.
As matter of fact, depreciation domestic currency has twofold effects, a country can gain trade surplus by depreciation which decreases its export price and enhances international competitiveness, and this is only the part of story, depreciation may also incur the retaliation of its trade partners due nation’s mutual interdependent relationship in globalization. From my perception, a country’s foreign exchange price is related to it export structure. For most developing countries, such as China, the majority of its exports are good and undervaluation may be favorable, and there is a different picture in developed countries, which has been discussed in the previous part of this paper.
Since the unified exchange rate system in 1994, there is little improvement on the foreign exchange rate system reform in China because the negative effect on adverse exchange rate movement has been a big concern for the government. It is seem to be the best option for Chinese government to peg China’s domestic currency, Renmingbi (RMB) to US Dollars. China indeed, has promoted its exports dramatically and gain significant trade surplus due to the US Dollars depression, the successful implementing export orientated strategy as well as catching up strategy, and China’s accessing to WTO, which has induced tariffs reduction of China’s trade partners. Apparently, the exchange rate has become a useful instrument to promote China’s exports, which could be regarded as a good example of policy coherence.
However, undervalued RMB has been expected to appreciate in the past three years, and such expectation has allured net foreign assets unexpected increasing in China and lead to significant surplus of capital account. As a result, accumulation of China’s foreign exchange reserves has enlarged sharply and high expectation of RMB appreciation is arising. Thus, Chinese government has to face dilemmas that involve multiple consequence of RMB appreciation, and multiple values that compete for dominance in shaping its behaviors. In order to alleviate the trade disputes arising from undervalued REM allegation, China government launched a reform plan on REM exchange rate formation mechanism on July 25, 2005, and the exchange rate of REM has been appreciated more that 20% totally in the past three and half years.
Meanwhile, the negative effect on REM appreciation has emerged gradually, with declining exports, increasing unemployment, slowing down the pace of rapid economic growth, and undermining China’s international competitiveness; Reforming on REM exchange rate formation mechanism, however, may also support China to gain more opportunity for international cooperation because RMB’s appreciation meet the needs of China’s trade partners and it is welcomed in international society.
Technically, China can combine trade policy, exchange rate policy as well as other macroeconomic policy to achieve police coherence as effective tools to gain more benefits from exports promoting. Furthermore, as a member of international society, it is necessary for China to take other factors into considerations when it makes decisions, and international cooperation from trade partners play curial role for China’s promoting exports. For Chinese government, it is not easy to utilize foreign exchange rate policy to enhance its international competitiveness, which heavily depends on prosperous national competitive strategy. It is a long journey for China to be a country with strong power to dominate the international financial system.
Four parts are presented in the dissertation. Part one is introduction, which covers background of research, methodology, research map and framework of the research, literature review, etc. The second part is the theoretical system, which contends two sections: section one is theoretical evolution, from Chapter 1 to Chapter 4; and section two is theoretical development, from Chapter 5 to Chapter 9. Part three is factual system, which shows the evolutionary process of China’s national competitive strategy, and the last part is conclusion. There is a mapping between theoretical system and factual system, and the two systems mirror each other, reflecting mutually.
A research preference is indicated directly in Chapter 1. Political economic analysis rather than neo-classical welfare economic analysis is applied in the dissertation because it focuses on how political factors impact on economic choices as well as its consequences, and the optimal research object is nation’s behaviors.
Chapter 2 demonstrates inductive comments on evolutionary international trade theory, which attempts to find out theoretical breakthrough. Several assumptions of international trade theory have been changed in Chapter 3, and it may induce retainable industry, multi-equilibriums and national interests conflicting. Moreover, trade conflict between America and Japan as a case suggests causes, forms and nature of trade conflict. Three important concepts, international competitiveness, comparative advantage and competitive advantage, are compared after reviewing Porter’s competitive strategy theory in Chapter 4 and the four chapters comprise the second part of dissertation which indicates theoretical evolution.
Theoretical development is displayed in the following five chapters which are regarded as a main body of the dissertation. Chapter 5 states the mobility, production paradigm and trade pattern have been transformed in globalization due to trade liberalization and the two parallel economic growth pattern----endogenous economic growth for core economy and exogenous economic growth for non-core economy, under the circumstances, national competitive strategy become a necessary options for each countries involving international trade. Factor endowments model is developed in Chapter 6, which focuses on the expension from visible factor endowments to invisible factor endowments, thus national competitive strategy regarded as invisible factor endowment is embedded into H—O factor endowments model which suggests the innovative extension on international trade framework. Furthermore, conflicting between American and Japanese exchange rate systems provides a sufficient supporting evidence to test the invisible factor endowments model and conclusion is favorable. Nature of exchange rate is discussed in Chapter 7. Exchange rate demonstrates its neutrality as a government policy object in traditional analysis, whereas it indicates non- neutrality as a government policy instrument. The theorem of“incompatible trinity”can be established with perfect capital mobility, and“compatible trinity”can be established with imperfect capital mobility. Thus, the fundamental condition of implementing nation’s competitive strategy is“incompatible trinity”with imperfect capital mobility. Strategic exchange rate is a key issue studied in Chapter 8, which is viewed as a government policy instrument to pursuing international competitiveness. A political economic model has been built to describe how the strategic exchange rate can be determined. In shortly, strategic exchange rate is mutual consequences depending on the bargaining power of domestic interest groups and the bargaining power of home country government as well as its trade partners’governments. National competitive strategy is also an effective mean to cope with business cycle discussed in Chapter 9. Strong domestic currency can be employed as a national competitive strategy to enhance its international competitiveness by core economy in economic booming; while weak domestic currency in bust. Meanwhile, exchange rate is optimal tool for risk management when the financial systemic risk emerges.
As a case study, China national competitive strategy formulation process is explored in the last three chapters consisting with the fact
引文
1参见Bhagwati, J. (1978), Anatomy and Consequences of Exchange Control Regimes, Ballinger Publishing Co., Cambridge, MA
1参见李建明企业核心能力分析,中国工业经济,1998年第11期
1参见波特1998年为《国家竞争优势》再版撰写的《再版介绍》,中文版,该书由李明轩,邱如美译,华夏出版社2002)
1参见杜两省和史永东译,A德雷泽著《宏观经济学中的政治经济学》译者序,经济科学出版社,2003,北京
1参见王洵“丛书总序”,本文为A德雷泽著《宏观经济学中的政治经济学》一书的“丛书总序”,经济科学出版社,2003,北京
1关于上述五个模型的详细内容,可参见D Rodrik(1995)撰写的“贸易政策的政治经济学”一文,论文被收录于Grossman和K.Rogoff主编的“国际经济学手册”第三卷,由Elsewier(纽约)出版。
1关于“混合经济体制”参见萨缪尔逊《经济学》,以及Rodrik (2000)Development Strategies for the Next Century, Working Paper, Harvard University.
1参见Bernard, A., Jensen J. B.和Schott的论文“Importers Exporters and Multinationals: A Portrait of Firms in the U. S. that Trade Goods”该论文被编入“Producer Dynamics: New Evidences from Micro Data”一书,该书由Jensen. J. B和Roberts M. J.编辑,芝加哥大学出版社出版。
1转引自Gomory, R. and W. Baumol (2000), Global Trade and Conflicing National Interests, MIT Press
2参见Hoa T.V. (2003), Competition Policy and Gpobal Competitiveness in Major Asian Economies, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
1参见周泽红,日本应对贸易摩擦的经验及启示-----以日美贸易摩擦为例,现代日本经济2006年1月
2参见赵瑾,日美贸易摩擦的历史演变及其在全球化下的特点,世界经济,2002年第1期
3参见赵春明,何艳.对美日贸易摩擦的回顾与展望,现代日本经济,2001年第4期
1尹斌:“基于贸易型经济的日元汇率长期走势分析”,日本问题研究,2006年第3期
2参见张宏:“日本产业政策的演进与中日贸易的发展”,当代经济研究,2004年第8期
1 Telser, L.1987, A Theory of Efficient Cooperation and Competition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
2 Piore, M.and Sabel C., 1984, The Second Industrial Divide, New York: Basic Books
3 Best, M. 1990. The New Competition: Institution of Industrial Restructuring, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press
4 World Bank , 2002, World Development Report: Building Institutions for Markets, World Bank and Oxford University Press
1 Laffront,J.J.(1998 )Competition, Information,and Development, Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economy, pp595-611
1参见波特“国家竞争优势”,李明轩、邱如美译,华夏出版社,2002年
2参见Neary (2003)发表在World Economics杂志上的论文“The Competitive versus Comparative Advantage”(p457-470)。该文详细地论述了竞争优势、比较优势和绝对优势间的关系。
1参见波特1998年为《国家竞争优势》再版撰写的《再版介绍》,中文版,该书由李明轩,邱如美译,华夏出版社北京2002第一版
1 Deardroff的观点引自高春亮的论文《国际贸易理论中的竞争优势》,该文收录于《转型中的结构变迁与经济增长》,上海三联书店,1998
1参见Cooke, P., (2002), Knowledge Economies: Cluster, Learning and Cooperative Advantages, Routlege Publisher, London, New York
2 Deardorff, Alan V., "Gains from Trade and Fragmentation," July 21, 2005.
1十九世纪末也曾出现过一次经济全球化,随着第一次世界大战的爆发而结束。参见Robert Went“The Enigma of Globalization”和“M.M.Weinstein编写的“Globalization what’s New?”
1参见程恩富、夏晖,“美国通过霸权掠夺他国财富”,马克思主义研究网,2008年3月25日
1参见宋成华:日本的金融战败与中国人民币升值,黑龙江社会科学,2008年第5期
2参见谢林:选择与结果,熊昆、刘永谋译,华夏出版社,北京,2007
1麦金农的观点引自Whitman(2003)“From Trade Liberalization to Economic Integration: The Clash Between Private and Public Goods”, Michigan University Working Paper.
1引自保罗﹒奥默罗德《蝴蝶效应经济学》,李华夏译,P154,中信出版社,2006年9月,
1哈伯勒所著《繁荣与萧条》一书初版于1937年,在后来的二十年间,几经改版,本文所参考的是商务印书馆1963年7月出版的中文版,该书根据1958年新版本翻译的。
2参见亚瑟.F伯恩斯和韦斯利C米切尔,《经济周期的计量》,NBER,P3,纽约。
1 Bordo, M., Eichengreen,B., Klingebiel, D., Martinez-Peria , S. M., (2001), Is the crisis problem gowning more server? Economic Policy 16(32):pp51-82
1参见范小云著《繁荣的背后——金融系统性风险本质、测度与管理研究》,中国金融出版社,2006年12月
1参见由Mayes等人所著,改进银行监管,方文等译,中国人民大学出版社,2006
2参见保罗奥默罗德《蝴蝶效应经济学》,李华夏译,P215,中信出版社,2006年9月,北京
1参见吴铭:《中国全球化的两次大课》,21世纪经济报道,2008年11月11日,第2版时评栏目
2关于演化博弈的相关模型参见[英]J M史密斯著,《演化与博弈论》,潘春阳译,王小卫校,复旦大学出版社,2008
1关于演化博弈论的方法在社会科学中较为成功地应用,参见[英]R萨格登著,《权利、合作与福利的经济学》,方钦译,韦森校,上海财经大学出版社,2008
1引自[英]托尼基利克著过分的倒退,p9,杨亚沙译,企业管理出版社,1994年,北京
1卢峰人民币实际汇率之谜(1979-2005)---基于事实比较和文献述评的观察,经济学季刊,2006年4月
1王仓峰、岳咬兴人民币实际汇率与中国两部门生产差异的关系----基于巴拉萨—萨缪尔森效应的实证分析,财经研究,2006年8月
2陈科、吕剑人民币实际汇率变动趋势分析----基于巴拉萨—萨缪尔森效应,财经科学,2008年第3期
1林伯强人民币均衡实际汇率的估计与实际汇率错位的测算,经济研究,2002年第12期
2张晓朴均衡与失调:1978-1999人民币汇率合理性评估,金融研究,2000年第8期
3魏巍贤、李丕东人民币均衡实际汇率实证研究:1980-2006,厦门大学学报(哲学与社会科学版),2007年第5期
1.何运忠,胡长明编著,思想地图,重庆出版社,2008
2.鲍亨斯基·J·M著,当代思维方法,童世骏等译,上海人民出版社,1987
3.柯廷顿·J,P·约翰逊,G·劳夫格伦著,开放经济非均衡宏观经济学,林谦译上海译文出版社,1992
4.田国强,现代经济学的基本分析框架与研究方法,经济研究,2005年第2期,p113-125.
5.拉兹洛·E著,进化—广义综合理论,闵家胤译,社会科学文献出版社,1988
6.普里高津·I著,从存在到演化—自然科学中的时间及复杂性,曾庆宏等译,上海科学技术出版社,1986
7.范剑青,姚琦伟著,非线性时间序列:建模、预测及应用,陈敏译,高等教育出版社,2005
8.佩尔森·T.,G·塔贝里尼著,政治经济学:对经济政策的解释,方敏等译,中国人民大学出版社,2007
9.罗宾斯·L.著,过去和现在的政治经济学,陈尚霖,王春育译,商务印书馆,1997
10.德雷泽·A著,《宏观经济学中的政治经济学》译者序,杜两省和史永东译,经济科学出版社, 2003
11.王洵“丛书总序”,本文为A·德雷泽著《宏观经济学中的政治经济学》一书的“丛书总序”,经济科学出版社, 2003
12.伊宁·G.著,货币政策理论:博弈论方法导论,杨伟国译,社会科学文献出版社,2002
13.汉斯·范登·德尔,本·范·维尔瑟芬著,民主与福利经济学,陈刚等译,中国社会科学出版社,1999
14.克莱夫·W·J·格兰杰著,经济学中的经验建模——设定与评价,洪福海译,中国人民大学出版社,2005
15.克莱夫·W·J·格兰杰,T·泰雷斯维尔塔著,朱保华等译,非线性经济建模,上海财经大学出版社,2006
16.克莱夫·W.J.格兰杰,艾瑞克·吉赛尔等著,格兰杰计量经济学文集(第一卷、第二卷),诺曼·R.斯旺森,马克·W.沃森选编,朱小斌等译,上海财经大学出版社,2007
17.哈尔·瓦里安,微观经济学(第三版),经济科学出版社,1997
18.沃尔特·恩德斯,应用计量经济学:时间序列分析(第二版),杜江,谢志超译,高等教育出版社,2006
19.刘崇仪,经济周期论,人民出版社,2006
20.刘崇仪,美元霸权与美国经济,陈继勇,刘崇仪(主编),21世纪初世界经济格局与中美经贸关系,西南财经大学出版社, 2005
21.庇古,福利经济学(1932年版),商务印书馆,北京,中文版, 2007
22.李保明,效用理论与纳什均衡选择,经济科学出版社,2003
23.劳伦斯·S·科普兰,汇率与国际金融,唐旭等译,中国金融出版社, 1992
24.迈克尔·波特,国家竞争优势,李明轩、邱如美译,华夏出版社,2002
25.蔡瑞胸,金融时间序列分析,潘家柱译,机械工业出版社,2006
26.杜进朝,汇率变动与贸易发展,上海财经大学出版社2004
27.张金昌,波特的国家竞争优势理论剖析,中国工业经济,2001年第9期,p53-58.
28.李未无,实际汇率与经济增长:来自中国的证据,《管理世界》,2005年第2期, p17-25.
29.麦金农R. I.,大野健一,美元与日元,远东出版社,上海, 1999
30.麦金农R. I.,美元本位下的汇率,东亚高储蓄两难,王信,何为译,中国金融出版社,北京,2005
31.麦金农R. I.,G·施纳布尔,东亚经济周期与汇率安排,何为译,中国金融出版社,北京,2003
32.麦金农R. I.,危机过后东亚美元标准的复兴:对高频钉住汇率的一种诠释, J. E.斯蒂格利茨,S.尤素福主编,“东亚奇迹的反思”,王玉清,朱文辉等译,中国人民大学出版社,2003
33.刘丽文,供应链管理思想及其理论和方法的发展过程,管理科学学报,2004年第4期,p81-88
34.何琼隽,汇率变动的经济分析,数量经济与技术经济研究,1995年11期
35.何琼隽,李子江编著,国际贸易原理(第三版),中山大学出版社,1999
36.何琼隽,基于MAS的供应链管理,工业工程,2005年第4期,p56-61
37.李子江,对策论与经济均衡,华南理工大学出版社,1992
38.李子江,数理经济:一般均衡理论与方法,中国社会科学出版社,1995
39.高春亮,国际贸易理论中的竞争优势,转型中的结构变迁与经济增长,三联出版社,1998
40.李晓钟,产业比较优势动态性的实证分析,国际贸易问题,2004年7月
41.陈立敏,基于比较优势四个来源的新钻石框架及其政策含义,国际贸易问题,2006年第4期
42.戈登斯坦M,P·特纳,货币错配,新兴市场国家的困境与对策,李扬,曾刚译,社会科学文献出版社,2005
43.克鲁格曼P.,汇率的不稳定性,张兆杰译,北京大学出版社,中国人民大学出版社,2000
44.格罗斯曼·G·M,E·赫尔普曼著,利益集团与贸易政策,李增刚译,中国人民大学出版社,2005
45.安迪森·维金著,美元的坠落,刘演龙译,广东经济出版社,2006,
46.萨诺L,泰勒M.P.,汇率经济学,何泽荣主译,西南财经大学出版社,2006
47.廖子光,金融战争,中国如何突破美元霸权,林小芳等译,中央编译出版社,2008
48.甘道尔夫·G,国际金融与开放经济的宏观经济学,靳玉英译,上海财经大学出版社,2006
49.尤素福S.,新千年的东亚奇迹, J. E.斯蒂格利茨,S.尤素福主编,“东亚奇迹的反思”,王玉清,朱文辉等译,中国人民大学出版社,2003
50.伊藤隆敏,东亚的增长、危机和经济前景,J. E.斯蒂格利茨,尤素福S.,主编“东亚奇迹的反思”,王玉清,朱文辉等译,中国人民大学出版社,2003
51.林毅夫、姚洋,东亚奇迹中的中国农村工业化收入,J. E.斯蒂格利茨和S.尤素福主编“东亚奇迹的反思”,王玉清,朱文辉等译,中国人民大学出版社,2003
52.浦田秀次郎,FDI----贸易关联的出现及东亚的经济增长,J. E.斯蒂格利茨, S.尤素福主编,“东亚奇迹的反思”,王玉清,朱文辉等译,中国人民大学出版社,2003
53.乔莫,东南亚政府政策交角色之反思,J. E.斯蒂格利茨, S.尤素福主编“东亚奇迹的反思”,王玉清,朱文辉等译,中国人民大学出版社,2003
54.王绍媛,中国对外贸易的战略选择,财经问题研究,2000年第5期
55.谢娟,浅谈两种贸易战略对中国的适用性,新疆财经,2001年第3期
56.王洪庆,外商直接投资对我国外贸竞争力的影响研究,商业经济与管理,2005年10月
57.王允贵,21世纪初期中国开放型经济发展战略研究,改革,2000年第2期
58.童有好,大国经济浅论——兼论我国经济发展战略,经济体制改革,1999年第3期
59.张静,汪寿阳,人民币均衡汇率与中国外贸,高等教育出版社,2005,
60.查理士·恩诺克,约翰·格林编,银行业的稳健与货币政策,中国金融出版社、国际货币基金组织,1999
61.安妮·克鲁格著,发展中国家的贸易与就业,李实,刘小玄译,上海人民出版社,上海三联书店,1995
62.汪翔,钱南著,公共选择理论导论,上海人民出版社,智慧出版有限公司,1993
63.杨长江,人民币实际汇率长期调整趋势研究,上海财经大学出版社,2007
64.赫伯特·马尔库塞著,单向度的人—发达工业社会意识形态研究,刘继译,上海译文出版社,1989
65.杨柳勇,国际收支结构研究:理论模式、国际比较及对中国现实的分析,中国金融出版社, 2003
66.亨利·明茨伯格,布鲁斯·阿尔斯特兰德,约瑟夫·兰佩尔著,战略历程,纵览战略管理学派,刘瑞红等译,机械工业出版社,2002,
67.斯蒂芬·P .梅基著,国际贸易,夏申,朱刚体,武桂馥译,中国社会科学出版社,1988
68.托尼·基利克著,过分的倒退,杨亚沙译,企业管理出版社,1994,
69.泰纳尔著,产业组织理论,马捷等译,人民大学出版社,1997,
70.魏巍贤,汇率战略的动态博弈模型及其应用,统计研究,2004年第4期
71.多米尼克,萨尔瓦多等著,欧元、美元和国际货币体系,贺英等译,复旦大学出版社,2007
72.斯泰恩·克莱森斯,托马斯·格莱森纳著,金融部门的软弱性是否损害了东亚奇迹?中国财政金融出版社,1998
73.理查德·邓肯著,美元危机成因、后果与对策,王靖国等译,东北财经大学出版社,2008
74.高铁梅,计量经济分析方法与建模,清华大学出版社,2006
75.丹尼斯·C,缪纳著,公共选择理论,杨学春等译,中国社会科学出版社,1999
76.雅各布·A,弗南克尔,阿萨夫·雷慈恩,阮志华著,世界宏观经济学:全球一体化下的财政政策与经济增长,郭庆旺,刘茜译,经济科学出版社,2005
77.雷达,刘元春著,人民币汇率与中国货币政策研究,中国经济出版社,2006
78.章和杰著,人民币一篮子货币汇率制度中权重的构建,中国社会科学出版社,2005
79.唐·埃思里奇著,应用经济学研究方法论,朱刚译,经济科学出版社,2007
80.埃尔赫南·赫尔普曼,保罗R.克鲁格曼著,市场结构和对外贸易――报酬递增、不完全竞争和国际贸易,尹翔硕,尹翔康译,上海三联书店,1993
81.鲁迪格·多恩布什等著,开放经济发展中国家政策制定者的工具,章晟曼译,中国财政经济出版社,1990
82.让·梯若尔著,金融危机、流动性与国际货币体制,陈志俊,闻俊译,中国人民大学出版社,2003
83.亚瑟·F·伯恩斯,韦斯利·C·米切尔,经济周期的计量,NBER,P3,纽约
84.哈伯勒著,繁荣与萧条,商务印书馆,该书根据1958年新版本翻译,1963
85.梅耶斯等人所著,方文等译,改进银行监管,中国人民大学出版社,2006
86.保罗,奥默罗德,蝴蝶效应经济学,李华夏译,P215,中信出版社,2006
87.IMF全球金融稳定报告, 2008年10月
88.萨格登R著,权利、合作与福利的经济学,方钦译,韦森校,上海财经大学出版社,2008
89.史密斯J M著,演化与博弈论,潘春阳译,王小卫校,复旦大学出版社,2008
90.曼瑟尔·奥尔森著,集体行动的逻辑,陈郁,郭宇峰,李崇新译,上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1995
91.乔纳森,安德森著,走出神话:中国不会改变世界的七个理由,余江,黄志强译,中信出版社,2006
92.格林斯坦,波比斯比编,政治经济学手册精选,周琦,胡君芳译,商务印书馆,1996
93.古德诺F·J著,政治与行政,王元译,华夏出版社,1987
94.詹姆斯·E·安德森,公共决策,唐亮译,华夏出版社,1987
95.阿瑟·奥肯著,平等与效率——重大的抉择,王奔洲,华夏出版社,1987
96.马克·霍伊著,国际贸易法,李文玺译,法律出版社,1992
97.伯尔蒂尔·欧林著,地区间贸易和国际贸易,王继祖等译校,商务印书馆,1986
98.斯坦利·杰文斯著,政治经济学理论,郭大力等译,商务印书馆,1984
99.施米托夫著,国际贸易法文选,赵秀文译,中国大百科全书出版社,1996
100.卡尔·波普尔著,猜想与反驳——科学知识的增长,傅继重,纪树立,周昌忠,蒋戈为译,上海译文出版社,1986
101.石川滋著,发展经济学的基本问题,胡欣欣等译,经济科学出版社,1992
102.马太田井正著,经济学学说史的模型分析,凌经球译,当代中国出版社,1994
103.阿维纳什·K.迪克希特著,经济理论中的最优化方法,冯曲,吴桂英译,格致出版社,上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2008
104.伍德里奇J.,横截面与面板数据的经济计量分析,王忠玉译,中国人民出版社,2006
105.阿里尔·鲁宾斯坦,有限理性建模,倪晓宁译,中国人民大学出版社,2005
106.阿罗·肯尼斯著,社会选择与个人价值,陈志武,崔之元译,四川人民出版社,1987
107.古诺·奥古斯丹,财富理论数学原理的研究,陈尚霖译,商务印书馆,1994
108.森·阿马蒂亚著,集体选择与社会福利,胡的的,胡毓达译,上海科学技术出版社, 2004
109.森·阿马蒂亚著,理性与自由,李风华译,中国人民大学出版社,2007
110.马克·布劳格著,经济学方法论,黎明星,陈一民,季勇译,北京大学出版社,1990
111.唐·埃思里奇著,应用经济学研究方法,朱钢译,赵京兴校,经济科学出版社,2007
112.格雷夫·阿夫纳著,大裂变——中世纪贸易制度比较和西方的兴起,郑江淮译,中信出版社,2008
113.竹尾治一郎编著,科学哲学,桂起权,王建新译,上海译文出版社,1994
114.约翰·罗尔斯著,正义论,谢延光译,上海译文出版社,1991
115.约瑟夫·格里科,约翰·伊肯伯里著,国家权力与世界市场:国际政治经济学,王展鹏译,北京大学出版社,2008
116.瓦尔特·欧肯著,国民经济学基础,左大培译,商务印书馆,1995
117.保罗·安东尼·萨缪尔森著,经济分析基础,甘华鸣,甘黎明,刘鹤译,甘华鸣校,北京经济学院出版社,1990
118.约拉姆·巴泽尔著,国家理论---经济权利、法律权利与国家范围,钱勇,曾咏梅译,上海财经大学出版社,2006
119.霍布豪斯L.T.著,形而上学的国家论,王淑钧译,商务印书馆,2004
120. Adams,F.G. and S.Ichimura. (eds.) (1998) East Asia Development,Westport,CT: Praeger.
121. Adams,F.G.,B.Gangnes,and Y.Shachmurove.(2006) Why is China so competitive,World Economy,95-122.
122. Arize, A.,T.Osang,and D.Slottje.(2000) Exchange rate volatility and foreign trade from thirteen LDCs,Journal of Business Economic Statistics,18: 10-17.
123. Bailey,M.,G. Tavlas,and M. Ulan. (1986) Exchange rate variability and trade performance:evidence from the Big Seven industrial countries, Weltwirtsch. Arch,122:466-477.
124. Bailey, M.,G. Tavlas,and M. Ulan.(1987)The impact of exchange rate volatility on export growth: some theoretical considerations and empiricalresults,Journal of Political Modeling,9:225.
125. Balassa, B. (1964) The Purchasing Power Parity Doctrine: A Reappraisal, The Journal of Political Economy, 72:584-596.
126.Balassa,B.(1965) Trade Liberalization and Revealed Comparative Advantage, Manchester School of Economics and Social Studies,32,2:99-12.
127. Balassa,B. (1982) Export Composition and Export Performance in the Industry countries,Review of Economics and Statistics,61,4 :604-607.
128. Balassa,B. (1985) Exports,Policy Choices,and Ecomonica in Developing Countries after 1973 Oil Shock,Journal of Development Economics18,2:23-35.
129. Bagwell,K. and R.W. Staiger (2002) An Economic of the World Trading System,The MIT Press,Cambridge,MA.
130. Baltagi, B.H. (2003)A Companion to Theoretical Econometrics,Blackwell Publishing,Ltd,Oxford,UK.
131. Barkin,D. (1998) Wealth,Poverty and Sustainable Development,Mexico: Editorial Jus. S. A. de C.V.
132.Becattini,G. (1999)Distretti industriali e made in Italy. Le basi socioculturali del nostro sviluppo,Boringhieri,Torino, Italy.
133.Benaroya, F. and D. Janic,(1999)‘Measuring exchange rate misaligment with PPP Estimate’,in Collingon,S.,Pisani-Ferry,J. and Yung Chul Park (ed.),Exchange Rate Policies in Emerging Asia Countries,Routlege,London .
134.Benedicits, L.D. (2005)Three Decades of Italian Comparative Advantages. World Economics, p1679-1709.
135. Bhagwati, J.N. (1978)Anatomy and Consequences of Exchange Control Regimes,Vol. 1,Studies in International Economics Relations,No.10 (New York: National Bureau of Economic Research).
136. Blaug,M. (1992) The Methodology of Economic. Or How Economists Explain.2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
137.Bordo, M., B.Eichengreen, D.Klingebiel,and S. M.Martinez-Peria. (2001) Is the crisis problem gowning more server? Economic Policy 16(32):51-82.
138. Brada,J.C.(1998)Introduction: exchange rates,capital flows,and commercialpolicies in transition economies,Journal of Comparative Economics,26,4: 613-620.
139.Broner,F. , N.Loayza,and H.Lopez. (1997) Misalignment and fundamentals: Equilibrium exchange rates in seven Latin American countries, Mimeo.,World Bank.
140.Chenery , H., S.Robinson , and M.Syrquin.(1986) Industrialization and Growth, Oxford University Press, World Bank,New York.
141.Chou, W. L. (2000)Exchange rate variability and China’s exports,Journal of Comparative Economics,28:61-79.
142.Copeland,L.S.(1989)Exchange Rates and International Finance,Addixon Wesley Publishing Company,England.
143.Choudhry,T.(2005)Exchange rate volatility and the United States exports: evidence from Canada and Japan, The Journal of Japanese and International Economies, 19:51-71.
144. Cose, D. (1981)The crawling peg and exchange rate uncertainty, in Williamson,J.,(ed.), Exchange Rate Rules: The Theory,Performance and Prospects of the Crawling Peg,St Martins,New York.
145. Cushnman,D.(1983)The effects of real exchange rate risk on international Trade,Journal of International Economics.
146. Cooper,R. (1987)Industrial Policy and Trade Distortion,in D.Salvatore (ed.) The New Protectionist Threat to World Welfare,Amsterdam and London: North-Holland, p233-265.
147. Cottani, J.A.,Cavallo,F.,and Shahbaz,K. (1990)Real Exchange Rate Behavior and Economic Performance in LDCs,Economic Development and Cluture Change,39:61-67.
148. Deardroff, A., (1987), Safeguards policy and conservative social welfare function, in Henryk Kierzkowski, ed., Protection and Competition in International Trade: Essays in Honor of W. M. Corden, Oxford: Blackwell, 1987, pp. 22-40.
149. De Bandt ,P., R. Hartmann (2000) Systemic Risk: A Survy, ECB Working Paper, No. 35
150.Dibooglu, S., A.M.Kutan (2001) Sources of Real Exchange rate fluctuations in transition economies: the case of Poland and Hungary, Journal of Comparative Economics, 29: 257-275.
151.Dornbush, R.(1992)The Case for Trade Liberalisation in Developing Countries,Journal of Economics Perspectives,6:69-85.
152. Drabek,Z. and J.C.Brada.(1998)Exchange rate regimes and the stability of trade policy in transition economies,Journal of Comparative Economics,26: 642-668.
153. Drine I. and C.Rault.(2003) Do Panel Data Permits the Rescue of the Balassa-Samuelson Hypothesis for Latin American Countries,Applied Economics, 35:351-359.
154. Edwards, S. 1992) Trade Orientation,Distortions and Growth in Developing Countries, Journal of Development Economics,39, 1:31-37.
155.Egert,B.,and I.Drine, K Lommatzsch, and C. Rault. (2003) The Balassa-Samuelson effect in Central and Eastern Europe: myth or reality? Journal of Comparatove Economics,552-572.
156. Frankel,J.(1996)Recent exchange rate experience and proposals for reform,American Economic Review,86,2: 153-158.
157.Frankel J. A.,Razin A,and Yuen,Chi-Wa,Fiscsal Policies and the World Economy, MIT Prress,Massachuset,USA,1987,1992,1996.
158. Faruqee,H. (1995) Long-run determinants of the real exchange rates: A stock-flow perspective, International Monetary Fund Staff Papers, 42:80-107.
159. Frankel,J.(1999),Economic Forum,IMF Survey,July 19,p238.
160. Feenstra,R.C. and J.N.Bhagwati (1982)‘Traffis seeking and the effient tariff’,in Bhagwati,J.N. (ed),Import competition and Response,The University of Chicago Press, Chicago,London.
161. Feldstein,M.(2005)‘The euro and the stability pact’,in Salvatore D (ed.) The Euro, The Dollar and The International Monetary System,复旦大学出版社,上海.
162. Gagnon, J. (1996) Net foreign assets and equilibrium exchange rates: Panel evidence,Federal Reserve Board International Finance Discussion Paper,No.574.
163. Gomes,L. (2003)The Economics and Ideology of Free Trade:A History Review, Edward Elgar,Cheltenham,UK
164. Gomory,R. and W.Baumol.(2000) Global Trade and Conflicting National Interests, MIT Press
165. Greenaway, D.,S.Leybourne,and Sapsford,S.(1997) Modelling growth and liberalisation: using smooth transitions analysis, Economic Inquiry , 35 (October): 798-914.
166. Grossman,G. and E. Helpman. (1991) Innovation and Growth in Global Economy, Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
167. Grossman,G. and E.Helpman (1994)‘Protection for sale’,American Economic Review,84: 833-850.
168. Graziani,A. (1989)L’economia italiana dal 1945 ad oggi,I1 Mulino,Bologna.
169.Hafner,C.M.(1998)Nonlinear Time Series Analysis with Applications to Foreign Exchange Rate Volatility,Physical-Verlag Heidelberg,New York.
170.Harrison,A. (1996) Opness and growth:a time series,cross-country analysis for developing countries,Journal of Development Economics,48,2:419-47.
171. Heitger,B. (1987)Import Protection and Export Performance: Their Impact on Economic Growth,Weltwirtschaftliches ARCHIV,123,2 :249-261.
172. Helpman,E. and Krugman,P.(1985) Market Structure and Foreign Trade,Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
173. Hill,C.W.L.(2005)International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace,McGraw-Hill,Boston Hill.
174.Hillman,A.L.(1989)The Political economy of protection,Harwood Academic Publishers,Chur.
175. Hillman,A.L.and P.Moser. (1995)‘Trade liberalization as politically optimal exchange of market access’in Canzoneri,M.,Ethier,W. and Grilli,V (ed.), The New Transatlantic Economy,Cambridge University Press,London and New York.
176. Hummels,D. and P. Klenow (2005)The variety and quality of a nation’s exports, American Economic Review,95,3:704-725.
177. International Monetary Fund(1998)World Economic Outlook, Washington,DC: IMF.
178. Irwin , D.A.(2005)“Trade and Globalization”, in Weinstein, M. (ed.) Globalization: What’s New? Columbia University Press, New York.
179. Issing,O.,(2007) The ECB and The Euro---The First 6 Years: A View from the ECB, in Salvator, D.,(ed.)The Euro, The Dollar, and The International Monetary System,复旦大学出版社,
180. Ito,T.,P.Isard, and S.Symansky.(1999)Economic growth and real exchange rate: a overview of Balassa-Samuelson hypothsis in Asia,in T. Ito and A.O. Krueger (ed.), Changes in Exchange Rate in Rapidly Developing Countries: Theory,Practice,and Policy Issues,The University of Chicago Press.
181. Jones,R.(2000) Globalization and the Theory of Input Trade,Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
182. Johnson,H. G. Optimum Tariffs and Retaliation,Review of Economic Studies,21 (2):142-153,1954.
183. Katzenstein,P. J. (1978),‘Introduction: Domestic and International Forces and Strategies of Foreign Economic Policy’,in Katzenstein P. J. (ed.),Between Power and Plenty, University of Wisconsin Press,Madison,p3-22.
184. Kemp,M. c (1964),The Pure Theory of International Trade,Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice Hall.
185. Kettell,S.(2004)The Political Economy of Exchange Rate Policy-Making,From the Gold Standard to the Euro,Palgerve Macmillan,New York.
186. Keuschning,M.(1999)Comparative Advantage in International Trade Theory and Evidence,Physica-Verlag,New York.
187. Keynes,J. Maynard.,The Future of the Foreign Exchange,Lloyels Bank Linrited: Monthly Review 6,Oct,1935.
188. Kim S.(1995)Expansion of markets and the geographic distribution of economic activities: The Trends in U.S. regional Manufacturing structure,1960-1987,Quarterly Journal of Economics,110,4:881-908.
189. Krueger A.(1978)Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: Liberalization Attempts and Consequences (Lexington,MA: Ballinger Press for NBER).
190. Krueger,A.(1997)Nominal anchor exchange rate policies as domestic distortion,Working paper of National Bureau of Economic Research,No.5968,Cambridge,MA.
191. Krueger,A.(1997)Trade policy and economic development: how we learn. American Economic Review,87(1):1-23.
192. Krugman,P(.1987)Is Free Trade Pass? Economic Perspective. 1(2):131-144
193.Krugman,P.(1987)Pricing to Market when the Exchange Rate Changes,in S.W. Akmdt and J.D.Richardson,Real-Financial Linkages,Cambridge,Mass,MIT press,49-70.
194. Krugman,P.(1991)History versus Expectations,Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol 106:651-667.
195. Krugman,P. (1992)A Decade of New Trade Theory,in International Trade Modelling, M.G. Dagenais & P-A Muet ed.,Chapman & Hall,London.
196. Krugman, P. (1994)‘Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession’,Foreign Affairs,28-44.
197. Lane,P.R. and G.M. Milesi-Ferretti.(2000)The transfer problem revisited: net foreign assets and real exchange rates,Discussion paper,No. 2511,London.
198.Lane, P.R. and G.M. Milesi-Ferretti.(2002).External wealth, the trade balance , and the real exchange rate , European Economic Review ,46:1049-1071.
199. Lafey,G.(1992)“The Measurement of Revealed Comparative Advantages”,in International Trade Modeling,(ed.) Dagenais and Muet,Chapman and Hall.
200. Levy,P. I., Lobbying and International Cooperation in Tariff Setting, Journal of International Economics,47:345-370,1999.
201. Lucas,R. (1988) On the Mechanics of Economic Development,Journal of Monetary Economics,22,1(July):3-42.
202. Li,W. (2005) Real Exchange Rate and Economic Growth: Evidence fromChina,Management World,2:17-26.
203. Magee,S.P.,W.A.Brook,and L.Young. (1989) Black Hole Tariffs and Endogenous Policy Theory,Cambridge University Press,Cambridge and New York.
204. Maggi,G. and A. Rodriguez-Clare,A Political-Economy Theory of Trade Agreements, 2007.
205. Marshall,A. 1920, Principle of Economics, London, Macmillan, 8th edition, 1920.
206.Mayer, W.(1984)Endogenous tariff formation,American Economic Review, 74:970-985.
207.Mayer,W. and J. Li.(1994) Interest groups,electoral competition,and probabilistic voting for trade policies,Economics & Polities,6:59-77.
208. McArthur,J. and J. Sachs. (2002)‘The Growth Competitiveness Index’,in World Economic Forum,The Global Competitiveness Report 2001-2002,Oxford University Press,Oxford.
209. Meade,J.E. (1952) A Geometry of International Trade, London: George Allen & Unwin.
210. McMillan,J. (2001) Game Theory in International Economics,Routledge,London.
211. Michaely, M.,D. Papageorgiou and A. Choksi (eds.) (1991) Liberalizing Foreign Trade, Vol. 7: Lessons and Experience in Developing World,Oxford and Cambridge,MA; Basil Blackwell.
212. Moon,B. E. (1998)‘Controversies in International Trade’,in Snarr M.T. and Snarr D.N. (ed.),Introducing Global Issues,Lynne Rienner Publisher,London.
213. Mundell,R. (2002) Cited by Went,R. in The Enigma of Globalization. A Journey to a New Stage of Capitalism,Routledge,London and New York.
214. Mundell , R.(2003)“Currency Area , Exchange Rate Systems , and International Monetary Reform”,in Slvastore D. al et,(ed.) The Dollarization Debate,Oxford University Press.
215. Neary,J. P. (2003) Competitive versus Comparative Advantage,WorldEconomics, 457-470.
216. Pearce,I.F. (1961) The problems of the balance of payments,International Economic Review,NO.2.
217. Pohl,N. (2001) Mobility in Space and Time,Challenge to the Theory of International Economics,Physica-Verlage,New York.
218. Porter,M. E. (1990) The Competitive Advantage of Nations,Free Press,New York.
219. Poter,M.E.(1996). Cluster and the New Economics of Competition,Harvard Business Review,76 (6):5.
220. Pritchett,L. (1995) Forget convergence: divergence past,present and future,Finance and Development (June 1995),p40-43.
221. Pritchett,L. (1997) Divergence: big time. Journal Economic Perspective,11(3):3-17.
222. Rodrik,D.,(1995) Political Economy of Trade Policy,in Grossman,G. and Rogoff, K. (ed.),Handbook of International Economics,vol. 3,Elsevier,New York,Oxford.
223. Romer,P. (1986) Increasing returns and long run growth,Journal of Political Economy, 94,5,(October):1002-1037.
224. Romer,P. (1990)Endogenous technological change,Journal of Political Economics,98 (October):71-102.
225. Romer,Paul. (1994) New Goods,Old Theory and the Welfare Costs of Trade Restrictions,Journal of Development Economics,43:5-38.
226. Sachs,J. D. (2005) Globalization and Patterns of Economic Growth,in Weinstein,M. (ed.) Globalization: What’s New? Columbia University Press,New York.
227. Salvatore,D. and T. Hatcher.(1991)Inward oriented and outward oriented trade strategies,Jounral of Development Studies,27,3(April):7-25.
228. Salvator,D.,(ed.)The Euro,The Dollar,and The International Monetary System,复旦大学出版社,2007.
229. Samuelson,P. A.(1964) Theoretical Notes on Trade Problems,Review ofEconomics and Statistics,46,(2):145-154.
230. Santos-Paulino,A. U. (2005) Trade Liberalisation and Economic Performanc: Theory and Evidence for Developing Countries,World Economy,p783-821.
231. Sercu,P. and C.Vanhulle. (1992) Exchange rate volatility,exposure and the value of exporting firms,Journal Banking Finance,16:155-182.
232. Signorini,L.F. (ed.) (2000) La sviluppo locale,Un’indagine della Banca d’Italia sui distretti industriali,Meridiana libri,Donzelli,Roma.
233. Snar,M.T. and D.N. Snar. (1998) Introducing Global Issues,Lynne Rienner Publisher, Boulder London.
234. Solow,R. (1957) A contribution to the theory of economic growth,Quarterly Journal of Economics,61,1 (February):65-94.
235.Sopraseuth, T. (2004),‘Exchange rate regimes and international business cycles: some stylized facts’, in Jean-Olivier Hairzult and Thepthida Sopraseuth (ed.), Exchange Rate Dynamics: A New Open Economy Macroecnomicis Perspective, Routledge, p 181-203
236. Staiger,R. and G. Tabellini,Discretionary trade policy and excessive protection, American Economic Review,77:340-348,1993.
237. Strange,S. (1977) Sterling and British Policy, Oxford University Press,London.
238. Taylor,L. (1991)‘Economic openness: problems to the century’s end’,in Banuri T. (ed.), Economic Liberalisation: No Panacea,Oxford Press,Oxford,p99-147.
239. Vernon,R. (1966) International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(May):190-207.
240. Vollrath,T.L. (1991)‘A theoretical evaluation of alternative trade intensity measure of revealed competitive advantage’,Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv,127,2:265-280.
241. Warr,P.G.(1994) Comparative and Competitive Advantage,Asian Pacific Economic Literature,8,2:1-14.
242. Walzenbach,G.P.E (1998)Co-ordination in Context: Institutional Choices to Promote Exports,Ashgate Publisher Ltd.,Aldershot,p85-86.
243. Went,R.( 2002)The Enigma of Globalization, A Journey To A New Stage of Capitalism, Routledge,London and New York,p2.
244. Westbrook,J.R. and T.D. Willet .(1999) Exchange rates as nominal anchors: an overview of the issues,in Sweeney,R.J.,Wihlbord,C.G.,and Willet T.D.,(ed.),Exchange Rate Policies for Emerging Market Economies,Westview Press.
245. Wignaraja,G. (2003)Competitiveness Strategy in Developing Countries,A Manual for Policy Analysis, Routledge, London and New York,p15.
246. Williamson , J.(1985)The exchange rate system , Policy Analysis in International Economics,NO.5,Washington D.C.,Institute for International Economics.
247. Wilson,P. and K.C. Tat. (2001)Exchange rate and the trade balance: the case of Singapore 1970 to 1996,Journal of Asian Economics,12:47-63.
