行为消费理论的拓展与应用研究
|
摘要
本文的写作目的在于,通过对行为消费理论的既有研究实施拓展,构建一个能够描述个体长期偏好与短期偏好之冲突的跨期选择模型,从而对个体时间偏好率的形成机制进行解释,并用以分析改革开放以来我国居民消费行为的阶段性特征。本文的主要研究内容共为三部分。
其一,本文对消费行为理论的缘起和发展做了简要回顾,并在此基础上指出,虽然生命周期假说与持久收入假说被作为新古典消费行为理论的两大基础,但实际上在这二者之间却存在着很大不同。其中,前者试图考察消费者怎样将其一生收入有效安排于每一期的使用,但后者却认为消费是由持久收入决定的,而持久收入的计算与消费者的时间偏好率有关,在连续时间状态下,时间偏好率的倒数可被近似地看作消费者计算持久收入的时长,根据经验测算,时间偏好率是一个很高的数值,意味着消费者用以计算持久收入的时间只有几年,亦即他的消费计划期限是几年而不是一生,这是一个更符合经验直觉的结论。然而,由于生命周期假说能更好地置于动态最优化的分析框架之中,而持久收入假说未能对时间偏好率的形成机制进行清晰的说明,因此经济学家逐渐遗弃了持久收入假说中富有启发意义的经验判断,而将其简单化地内嵌于生命周期假说之中,这种合二为一的方法就是新古典消费行为理论的基本研究范式,但毫无疑问的是,这种范式从其诞生之日起就必然在分析现实问题时面临很多困难。
其二,在上述讨论的基础上,我们认为,通过对行为消费理论的既有研究实施合理拓展,可以对时间偏好率的形成机制进行一定说明,从而在消费行为理论中恢复持久收入假说被遗弃的观点。行为消费理论是指行为经济学在消费行为方面的既有研究成果,而行为经济学可被认为是新古典经济学对其固有研究框架进行质变突破的自我努力。在本文中,我们以行为消费理论中的双自我模型为基本分析框架,将个体视为由关心长期利益的计划者与关心眼前利益的行为者两种人格构成,并认为任何决策行为都是这两种人格力量的冲突产物。计划者要想尽量实现长期消费计划,就必须对每一期的行为者实施一定约束,方法是使用意志力或者是为行为者建立心理账户,这就是个体的自我控制行为。其中,建立心理账户是比使用意志力更为节省心理成本的方法,它具体是指,个体会将一生收入资源划分为当前可支配账户、当前资产账户与未来收入账户三部分,这些账户之间是不可完全替代的,并且每个账户的边际消费倾向是按顺序递减的,意味着个体可通过重新安排各账户内的资源来改变总体消费倾向。我们所要论证的是,当计划者通过建立心理账户来控制行为者的选择时,会导致最终的消费计划无法达到任何跨期一阶条件,其现实含义是,心理账户的约束可能会导致个体在仍具有扩大消费的意愿时却停止了进一步的消费,于是短期下的时间偏好率将维持在较高的水平上,这样就为持久收入假说的经验判断提供了一定的理论解释。
其三,根据上述双自我模型的基本结论,本文对我国自改革开放以来的居民消费行为进行了研究。由于我国正处于经济体制转型时期,因此居民的消费行为也带有一定的阶段性特征。对此,我们将改革开放以来的时期划分为1978年至1990年的“不完全消费市场格局”与1991年至2007年的“建立完全消费市场”的两个阶段,并分别从短期消费波动对收入波动的敏感性以及长期消费增长与收入增长的关系两方面探讨了这种阶段性特征的存在性。在此基础上,本文对1978年以来我国居民的时间偏好率进行了测算,发现时间偏好率始终维持一个较高的水平,并且呈逐年递增的趋势,这意味着居民的消费计划期限正不断递减,根据双自我模型可以推知,这是由于居民消费的自我控制程度不断加深所致,亦即在其心理账户结构中,当前可支配账户的比例正逐渐降低,这是导致1990年以来我国居民消费需求持续低迷的重要原因。对此,我们考察了居民储蓄动机的跨阶段变化,发现谨慎动机、子女教育动机以及遗赠动机的提升是导致居民心理账户结构发生转变的原因,而这进一步与公共福利制度的变迁以及收入分配差距的扩大有关。据此,我们给出的政策建议是:一方面,政府应当对高收入者的当前资产账户与未来收入账户进行课税,如房产税与遗产税等,从而促使高收入者将部分财富从这些账户转移到诱惑力更强的当前可支配账户之中;另一方面,政府从高收入阶层所课征来的各种税收,不应全部以收入或转移支付的形式进行再分配,而应将其用于扩大社会保障与教育等公共福利方面的支出,这与简单的转移支付相比,能够更有效地“充实”较低收入者的当前资产账户与未来收入账户,从而使其无需将更多资源存储于这些诱惑力较低的账户之中。这样,各阶层居民的边际消费倾向都将得到提升,从而刺激现时消费水平的增长。
The purpose of this paper is to develop a model of intertemporal choice on the basis of the behavioral consumption theory. The model incorporates the conflict of individual's long-run preference and short-run preference and with which one can analysis the formation of time preference rate and stage characters of consumer behavior since Chinese Reform and Opening Up began. This paper is composed by three parts.
First, we review the emergence and development of consumption theory. We will argue that, though the neoclassical consumption theory is rooted in the life-cycle hypothesis and the permanent income hypothesis, there are deep gaps between the two theories. The life-cycle hypothesis tries to reveal how consumer can arrange the uses of resources of the whole life effectively, while the permanent income hypothesis argues that consumption is determined by permanent income, which is related to the subjective rate of time preference. If the permanent income function is continuous, the inverse of time preference rate can be seen as the effective time span of calculating permanent income. The empirical evaluation shows that time preference rate is very high, which means that the effective time span of calculating permanent income is only several years. This follows the conclusion that the consumer planning horizon is rather shorter than the whole life time, which is more agreed with the empirical intuition. Unfortunately, the life-cycle hypothesis can be expressed as a dynamic maximization problem while the permanent income hypothesis cannot explain how the time preference rate is determined clearly. So economists abandon the empirical conclusion of permanent income hypothesis and integrate this hypothesis into the life-cycle hypothesis arbitrarily. This is the primary version of neoclassical consumption theory. Undoubtedly, this theory cannot explain and predict the real consumer behavior effectively.
Second, we find that the determination of time preference rate can be described by the behavioral consumption theory with some modisfications, which can then make the abandoned viewpoint of the permanent hypothesis come back. The behavioral consumption theory is the research on consumer behavior based on the methodology of behavioral economics. Behavioral economics can be seen as the qualitative break of neoclassical economics. This paper is based on the dual-self model and assumes that any individual is composed of two personalities, one is planner who is concerned with the long-run preference and the other is doer who is concerned with the immediate preference. Thus, any decision can be seen as the conflict of the two personalities. The planner who wants to realize the long-run optimal consumption plan must impose some constraint on the does of each period. Willpower and mental account system is the two ways by which doers can be controlled. This is the self control problem of individual. Generally speaking, using mental account system is cheaper than willpower. There exist three main mental accounts which are current disposable account, current asset account, and future income account, respectively. These accounts are not fungible, and the marginal propensity to consume is assumed to be account specific, which means that individual can change the marginal propensity to consume by rearrange the structure of accounts. We will prove that when the planner controls the does by mental accounts, the final consumption plan cannot reach any first order condition. This means that the constraint by mental accounts may stop individual's consumption even he has the willingness to consume. Thus time preference rate will be very high. This is a possible theoretical explanation to the empirical conclusion of the permanent hypothesis.
Third, we investigate the consumer behavior since Chinese Reform and Opening Up began. Because of the reform, there exist obvious stage characters of consumer behavior. We divide the whole phase after 1978 into two stages, one is called "Imperfect Consumer Market" (1978-1990), the other is called "the Primal Progress of Consumer Market Reform" (1991-2007). We investigate the excess sensitiveness of short-term consumption fluctuation to income fluctuation and the relationship of long-term consumption growth with income growth. We find that the stage characters of consumer behavior cannot be negligent. Furthermore, we evaluate the consumer time preference rate since 1978. We find that the value of time preference rate is very high and increasing with years. This means that the consumer planning horizon is decreasing. With the implications of dual-self model, we can then predict that consumers impose more and more control on themselves and the proportion of current disposable account in mental account system is lower. This is why the consumer demand is insufficient since 1990. So we investigate the changes of saving motives of individuals and find that the precautionary motive, children-education motive and bequest motive are very intensive since 1990 which urge individuals to change their structure of mental account system. We will argue that the reform of public welfare system and the worsening of income distribution are two important reasons which can explain the changes of saving motives since 1990. This will be followed by some policy implications: On one hand, government should tax current asset account and future income account of the high-income population such as death tax and house tax, so that they may adjust their mental accounts structure and the proportion of current disposable account will be higher. On the other hand, government should raise the expenses on social security and public education rather than transfer payment. This will enlarge current asset account and future income account of the low-income population and they may store more spendable resources in current disposable account. Thus, the whole population will raise their propensities to consume and the consumption demand will increase.
其一,本文对消费行为理论的缘起和发展做了简要回顾,并在此基础上指出,虽然生命周期假说与持久收入假说被作为新古典消费行为理论的两大基础,但实际上在这二者之间却存在着很大不同。其中,前者试图考察消费者怎样将其一生收入有效安排于每一期的使用,但后者却认为消费是由持久收入决定的,而持久收入的计算与消费者的时间偏好率有关,在连续时间状态下,时间偏好率的倒数可被近似地看作消费者计算持久收入的时长,根据经验测算,时间偏好率是一个很高的数值,意味着消费者用以计算持久收入的时间只有几年,亦即他的消费计划期限是几年而不是一生,这是一个更符合经验直觉的结论。然而,由于生命周期假说能更好地置于动态最优化的分析框架之中,而持久收入假说未能对时间偏好率的形成机制进行清晰的说明,因此经济学家逐渐遗弃了持久收入假说中富有启发意义的经验判断,而将其简单化地内嵌于生命周期假说之中,这种合二为一的方法就是新古典消费行为理论的基本研究范式,但毫无疑问的是,这种范式从其诞生之日起就必然在分析现实问题时面临很多困难。
其二,在上述讨论的基础上,我们认为,通过对行为消费理论的既有研究实施合理拓展,可以对时间偏好率的形成机制进行一定说明,从而在消费行为理论中恢复持久收入假说被遗弃的观点。行为消费理论是指行为经济学在消费行为方面的既有研究成果,而行为经济学可被认为是新古典经济学对其固有研究框架进行质变突破的自我努力。在本文中,我们以行为消费理论中的双自我模型为基本分析框架,将个体视为由关心长期利益的计划者与关心眼前利益的行为者两种人格构成,并认为任何决策行为都是这两种人格力量的冲突产物。计划者要想尽量实现长期消费计划,就必须对每一期的行为者实施一定约束,方法是使用意志力或者是为行为者建立心理账户,这就是个体的自我控制行为。其中,建立心理账户是比使用意志力更为节省心理成本的方法,它具体是指,个体会将一生收入资源划分为当前可支配账户、当前资产账户与未来收入账户三部分,这些账户之间是不可完全替代的,并且每个账户的边际消费倾向是按顺序递减的,意味着个体可通过重新安排各账户内的资源来改变总体消费倾向。我们所要论证的是,当计划者通过建立心理账户来控制行为者的选择时,会导致最终的消费计划无法达到任何跨期一阶条件,其现实含义是,心理账户的约束可能会导致个体在仍具有扩大消费的意愿时却停止了进一步的消费,于是短期下的时间偏好率将维持在较高的水平上,这样就为持久收入假说的经验判断提供了一定的理论解释。
其三,根据上述双自我模型的基本结论,本文对我国自改革开放以来的居民消费行为进行了研究。由于我国正处于经济体制转型时期,因此居民的消费行为也带有一定的阶段性特征。对此,我们将改革开放以来的时期划分为1978年至1990年的“不完全消费市场格局”与1991年至2007年的“建立完全消费市场”的两个阶段,并分别从短期消费波动对收入波动的敏感性以及长期消费增长与收入增长的关系两方面探讨了这种阶段性特征的存在性。在此基础上,本文对1978年以来我国居民的时间偏好率进行了测算,发现时间偏好率始终维持一个较高的水平,并且呈逐年递增的趋势,这意味着居民的消费计划期限正不断递减,根据双自我模型可以推知,这是由于居民消费的自我控制程度不断加深所致,亦即在其心理账户结构中,当前可支配账户的比例正逐渐降低,这是导致1990年以来我国居民消费需求持续低迷的重要原因。对此,我们考察了居民储蓄动机的跨阶段变化,发现谨慎动机、子女教育动机以及遗赠动机的提升是导致居民心理账户结构发生转变的原因,而这进一步与公共福利制度的变迁以及收入分配差距的扩大有关。据此,我们给出的政策建议是:一方面,政府应当对高收入者的当前资产账户与未来收入账户进行课税,如房产税与遗产税等,从而促使高收入者将部分财富从这些账户转移到诱惑力更强的当前可支配账户之中;另一方面,政府从高收入阶层所课征来的各种税收,不应全部以收入或转移支付的形式进行再分配,而应将其用于扩大社会保障与教育等公共福利方面的支出,这与简单的转移支付相比,能够更有效地“充实”较低收入者的当前资产账户与未来收入账户,从而使其无需将更多资源存储于这些诱惑力较低的账户之中。这样,各阶层居民的边际消费倾向都将得到提升,从而刺激现时消费水平的增长。
The purpose of this paper is to develop a model of intertemporal choice on the basis of the behavioral consumption theory. The model incorporates the conflict of individual's long-run preference and short-run preference and with which one can analysis the formation of time preference rate and stage characters of consumer behavior since Chinese Reform and Opening Up began. This paper is composed by three parts.
First, we review the emergence and development of consumption theory. We will argue that, though the neoclassical consumption theory is rooted in the life-cycle hypothesis and the permanent income hypothesis, there are deep gaps between the two theories. The life-cycle hypothesis tries to reveal how consumer can arrange the uses of resources of the whole life effectively, while the permanent income hypothesis argues that consumption is determined by permanent income, which is related to the subjective rate of time preference. If the permanent income function is continuous, the inverse of time preference rate can be seen as the effective time span of calculating permanent income. The empirical evaluation shows that time preference rate is very high, which means that the effective time span of calculating permanent income is only several years. This follows the conclusion that the consumer planning horizon is rather shorter than the whole life time, which is more agreed with the empirical intuition. Unfortunately, the life-cycle hypothesis can be expressed as a dynamic maximization problem while the permanent income hypothesis cannot explain how the time preference rate is determined clearly. So economists abandon the empirical conclusion of permanent income hypothesis and integrate this hypothesis into the life-cycle hypothesis arbitrarily. This is the primary version of neoclassical consumption theory. Undoubtedly, this theory cannot explain and predict the real consumer behavior effectively.
Second, we find that the determination of time preference rate can be described by the behavioral consumption theory with some modisfications, which can then make the abandoned viewpoint of the permanent hypothesis come back. The behavioral consumption theory is the research on consumer behavior based on the methodology of behavioral economics. Behavioral economics can be seen as the qualitative break of neoclassical economics. This paper is based on the dual-self model and assumes that any individual is composed of two personalities, one is planner who is concerned with the long-run preference and the other is doer who is concerned with the immediate preference. Thus, any decision can be seen as the conflict of the two personalities. The planner who wants to realize the long-run optimal consumption plan must impose some constraint on the does of each period. Willpower and mental account system is the two ways by which doers can be controlled. This is the self control problem of individual. Generally speaking, using mental account system is cheaper than willpower. There exist three main mental accounts which are current disposable account, current asset account, and future income account, respectively. These accounts are not fungible, and the marginal propensity to consume is assumed to be account specific, which means that individual can change the marginal propensity to consume by rearrange the structure of accounts. We will prove that when the planner controls the does by mental accounts, the final consumption plan cannot reach any first order condition. This means that the constraint by mental accounts may stop individual's consumption even he has the willingness to consume. Thus time preference rate will be very high. This is a possible theoretical explanation to the empirical conclusion of the permanent hypothesis.
Third, we investigate the consumer behavior since Chinese Reform and Opening Up began. Because of the reform, there exist obvious stage characters of consumer behavior. We divide the whole phase after 1978 into two stages, one is called "Imperfect Consumer Market" (1978-1990), the other is called "the Primal Progress of Consumer Market Reform" (1991-2007). We investigate the excess sensitiveness of short-term consumption fluctuation to income fluctuation and the relationship of long-term consumption growth with income growth. We find that the stage characters of consumer behavior cannot be negligent. Furthermore, we evaluate the consumer time preference rate since 1978. We find that the value of time preference rate is very high and increasing with years. This means that the consumer planning horizon is decreasing. With the implications of dual-self model, we can then predict that consumers impose more and more control on themselves and the proportion of current disposable account in mental account system is lower. This is why the consumer demand is insufficient since 1990. So we investigate the changes of saving motives of individuals and find that the precautionary motive, children-education motive and bequest motive are very intensive since 1990 which urge individuals to change their structure of mental account system. We will argue that the reform of public welfare system and the worsening of income distribution are two important reasons which can explain the changes of saving motives since 1990. This will be followed by some policy implications: On one hand, government should tax current asset account and future income account of the high-income population such as death tax and house tax, so that they may adjust their mental accounts structure and the proportion of current disposable account will be higher. On the other hand, government should raise the expenses on social security and public education rather than transfer payment. This will enlarge current asset account and future income account of the low-income population and they may store more spendable resources in current disposable account. Thus, the whole population will raise their propensities to consume and the consumption demand will increase.
引文
[1]吴敬琏,杨长福,朱铁臻等.正确处理生产和消费的关系.经济研究,1983(5),28-36
[2]熊必琳,陈蕊,杨善林.中国内需结构分析及增长模式转变.经济与管理研究,2007(7),22-26
[3]凯恩斯.就业、利息和货币通论.高鸿业译.北京:商务印书馆,1999
[4]Duesenberry J S.Income,saving,and the theory of consumer behavior.Cambridge,Mass.Harvard University Press,1949
[5]Modigliani F,Brumberg R.Utility analysis and the consumption function:an interpretation of cross-section data.in:Kurihara K K.ed.Post Keynsian Economics.New Brunswick NJ:Rutgers University Press,1954
[6]Friedman M.A theory of the consumption function.Princeton,N J:Princeton University Press,1957
[7]Hall R E.Stochastic implications of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis:theory and evidence.Journal of Political Economy,1978,86:971-987
[8]Zeldes S P.Consumption and liquidity constraints:an empirical investigation.Journal of Political Economy,1989,97:305-346
[9]Carroll C D.The buffer-stock theory of saving:some macroeconomics evidence.Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,1992,2:61-156
[10]Caroll C D,Kimball M S.On the concavity of consumption function.Econometrica,1996,64(4):981-992
[11]Leland H E.Savings and uncertainty:the precautionary demand for saving.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1968,82:465-473
[12]臧旭恒.中国消费函数分析.上海:上海三联出版社、上海人民出版社,1994
[13]李子奈.计量经济学——方法和应用.北京:清华大学出版社,1992
[14]厉以宁.中国宏观经济的实证分析.北京:北京大学出版社,1992
[15]王信.我国居民收入高增长时期的储蓄存款分析.经济科学,1996(5),24-31
[16]赵志君.我国居民储蓄率的变动和因素分析.数量经济技术经济研究,1998(8),23-26
[17]袁志刚,宋铮.城镇居民消费行为变异与我国经济增长.经济研究,1999(11):20-28
[18]龙志和,周浩明.中国城镇居民预防性储蓄实证研究.经济研究,2000(11),33-38
[19]万广华,张茵,牛建高.流动性约束、不确定性与中国居民消费.经济研究,2001(11),35-45
[20]孟昕,黄少卿.中国城市的失业、消费平滑和预防性储蓄.经济社会体制比较,2001(6),41-51
[21]李实,Knight.中国城市中的三种贫困类型.经济研究,2002(10),47-58
[22]万广华,史清华,汤树梅.转型经济中农户储蓄行为:中国农村的实证研究.经济研究,2001(11),3-12
[23]罗楚亮.经济转轨、不确定性与城镇居民消费行为.经济研究,2004(4),100-106
[24]余永定,李军.中国居民消费函数的理论与验证.中国社会科学,2000(1),123-133
[25]叶海云.试论流动性约束、短视行为与我国消费需求疲软的关系.经济研究,2000(11),39-44
[26]金晓彤,杨晓同.中国城镇居民消费行为变异的四个假说及其理论分析.经济研究,2004(11),5-14
[27]Thaler R H.Mental accounting and consumer choice.Marketing Science,1985,Vol.4,No.3:199-214
[28]Shefrin H M,Thaler R H.The behavioral life-cycle hypothesis.Economy Inquiry,1988,Vol.ⅩⅩⅥ:609-643
[29]Loewenstein G,Prelec D.Anomalies in intertemporal choice:evidence and an interpretation.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992,Vol.107,No.2:573-597
[30]Fisher I.The theory of interest.London:MacMillan,1930
[31]Kuznets S.National income,a summary of findings.NBER paper,1946
[32]Friedman M.Windfalls,the "horizon" and related concepts in the permanent income hypothesis,in:Carl F C.et al.eds.Measurement in Economics:Studies in Mathematical Economics and Econometrics.Stanford,Calif.:Stanford University Press,1963
[33]希克斯.价值与资本.薛蕃康译.北京:商务印书馆,1962
[34]Cagan P.The monetary dynamics of hyperinflation.In:Friedman M ed.Studies in the Quantity Theory of Money.Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1955
[35]Mayer T.Permanent income,wealth,and consumption:a critique of the permanent income theory,the life-cycle hypothesis and related theories.Berkeley:University of California Press,1972
[36]迪顿.理解消费.胡景北,鲁昌译.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2003
[37]Carroll C D.A theory of the consumption function,with and without liquidity constraints.2001,www.econ.jhu.edu/people/carroll/carroll.html
[38]Liviatan N.Errors in variables and Engel cureve analysis.Econometrica,1961,29,No.3:336-362
[39]Mohabbat K A,Simos E V.Consumer horizon:future evidence.The Journal of Political Economy,1977,Vol.85,No.4:851-858
[40]Landsberger M.The consumption function and windfall receipts.Jerusalem:Bank of Israel,Res.Dep.,1970
[41]Flavin M.The adjustment of consumption to changes in expectations about future income.The Journal of Political Economy,1981,Vol.89,No.5:974-1009
[42]Daly V,Hadjimatheou G.Stochastic implications of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis:evidence for the UK economy.Journal of Political Economy,1981,89:596-599
[43]Mankiw N G,Shapiro M.Trends,random walks,and tests of the permanent income hypothesis.Journal of Monetary Economics,1985,16:165-174
[44]Stock J,West K D.Integrated regressors and tests of the permanent income hypothesis. Journal of Monetary Economics,1988,21:85-95
[45]Mankiw N G.Hall's consumption hypothesis and durable goods.Journal of Monetary Economics,1982,10:417-425
[46]Campbell Y,Deaton A.Why is consumption so smooth? Review of Economic Studies,1989,56:357-374
[47]Romer D.Advanced macroeconomics.McGraw-Hill,1996
[48]Carroll C,Summers L H.Consumption growth parallels income growth:some new evidence.NBER Working Paper Series,No.3090,1989
[49]Campbell Y,Mankiw N G.Consumption,income and interest rotes:reinterpreting the time series evidence.In:Blanchard O J,Fischer S eds.NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1989.Cambridge,Mass.MIT Press,1989
[50]Caballero R J.Consumption puzzles and precautionary saving.Journal of Monetary Economics,1990,25:113-136
[51]Dynan K E.How prudent are consumers.Journal of political Economy,1993,Vol.101:1104-1113
[52]Romer D.Advanced macroeeonomics.2~(nd) Ed.McGraw-Hill,2000
[53]Deaton A.Saving and liquidity constraints.Econometrica,1991,59:1221-1248
[54]Carroll C D.Buffer stock saving and the life cycle/permanent income hypothesis.Mimeo,Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,1993
[55]罗楚亮.经济转轨、不确定性与城镇居民消费行为.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2006
[56]Attela V,Rosati F C,Rossi M C.Precautionary saving and health risk:evidence from the Italian households using a time series of cross sections.Mimeo,from Network,2002
[57]贺京同,那艺.传承而非颠覆:从古典、新古典到行为经济学.南开学报(哲社版),2007(2),122-130
[58]哈尔·瓦里安.微观经济学高级教程.周洪等译.北京:经济科学出版社,1997
[59]阿马蒂亚·森.伦理学与经济学.王宇等译.北京:商务印书馆,2000
[60]劳伦斯·A·博兰.批判的经济学方法论.王铁生等译.北京:经济科学出版社,2000
[61]Gale D.Is psychology the future of economics? http://silverdialogues.fas.nyu.edu/docs/,2005
[62]约翰·杜威.哲学的改造.许崇清译.北京:商务印书馆,2002
[63]Freidman M.The methodology of positive economies,in:Assays in Positive Economics.Chicago:University of Chicago press,1953
[64]Benartzi S,Thaler R H.Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,110:73-92
[65]Akerlof G A,Yellen J L.The fair wage-effort hypothesis and unemployment.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1990,105(2):255-83
[66]Wilkinson N.An introduction to behavioral economics.New York:Palgrave Press,2008
[67]Camerer C F,Loewenstein G.Behavioral economies:past,present,future,in:Camerer C F.et al.eds.Advances in Behavioral Economies.Princeton University Press,2004
[68]D'Orlando F,Snfilippo E.Behavioral foundations for the Keynesian consumption function.http://ssrn.com/abstract=961780,2006
[69]Loewenstein G,Thaler R H.Anomalies:intertemporal choice.The Journal of Economic Perspectives,Vol.3,No.4:181-193
[70]Nagel R.Unravelling in guessing games:an experimental study.American Economic Review,1995,85:1313-1326
[71]Grether D.M,Plott,C.Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon.American Economic Review,1979,69(4):623-638
[72]贺京同,那艺.个体行为动机与行为经济学.经济社会体制比较,2007(3),12-18
[73]贺京同,那艺,王晓岚.个体行为研究的异质化演进.经济学动态,2007(2),79-83
[74]Keynes J N.The scope and method of political economy.London:Macmillan,1891
[75]马克斯·韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神.彭强等译.西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2002
[76]Fudenberg D.Advancing beyond 'advances in behavioral economics'.Journal of Economics Literature,2006,Vol.XLIV:694-711
[77]Thaler R H.Mental accounting matters.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,1999,12:183-206
[78]Skinner J.Housing wealth and aggregate saving.NBER Working Paper Series,No.2842,1989
[79]Venti S F,Wise D A.But they don't want to reduce housing equity.NBER Working Paper Series,No.2859,1989
[80]Cagan P.The effect of pension plans on aggregate savings.New York:NBER,1965
[81]Katona G.Private Pensions and individual saving.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1965
[82]King M A,Dicks-Mireaux L D L.Asset holdings and the life cycle.Economic Journal,1982:247-267
[83]Kahneman,D,Tversky A.Prospect theory:an analysis of decision under risk.Econometrica,1979,47:263-291
[84]Thaler R H.Toward a positive theory of consumer choice.Journal of Economics Behavior and Organization,1980,1:39-60
[85]Read D,Loewenstein G,Rabin M.Choice Bracketing.Unpublished Working Paper,Carnegie Mellon University,1998
[86]Strotz R H.Myopia and inconsistency in dynamic utility maximization.Review of Economic Studies,1956,23:165-180
[87]Thaler R H.Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency.Economic Letters,1981,8:201-207
[88]Prelec D,Loewenstein G.Decision making over time and under uncertainty:a common approach.Management Science,1991,Vol.37,No.7:770-786
[89]Ainslie G.Specious reward:a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.Psychological Bulletin,1975,82:463-509
[90]Herrnstein R J.Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement.Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior,1961,4:267-272
[91]Mazur J E.An adjustment procedure for studying delayed reinforcement,in:Commons M L.et al.eds.Quantitative Analysis of Behavior:the Effect of Delay and of Intervening Events on Reinforcement Value,Chapter 2.Ballinger,Hillsdale,NJ,1987
[92]Angeletos G-M,Laibson D,Repetto A,et al.The hyperbolic consumption model:calibration,simulation,and empirical evaluation.Journal of Economic Perspectives,2001,Vol.15,No.3:47-68
[93]Prelec D.Decreasing impatience:definition and consequences.Harvard Business School Working Paper,1989
[94]Peleg B,Yaari M E.On the existence of a consistent course of action when tastes are changing.Review of Economic Studies,1973,XL:391-401
[95]Laibson D.Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,May,1997:443-477
[96]亚当·斯密.道德情操论.蒋自强等译.北京:商务印书馆,1997
[97]Rae J.the Sociological Theory of Capital.London:MacMillan,1834
[98]Bohm-Bawerk E V.The positive theory of capital,translated by Smart V.London:MacMillan,1981
[99]Samuelson P.A note on measurement of utility.Review of Economic Studies,1937,4:155-161
[100]Olson M,Bailey M J.Positive time preference.Journal of Political Economy,1981,89:1-25
[101]Samuelson P.Probability,utility,and the independence axiom.Econometriea,1952,20:4:670-678
[102]McIntosh D.The foundations of human society.Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1969
[103]Thaler R H,Shefrin H M.An economic theory of self-control.Journal of Political Economy,1981,Vol.89,No.2:392-406
[104]中国社会科学院经济研究所居民行为课题组.居民的消费选择与国民经济成长.经济研究,1988(1),26-42
[105]龙志和.我国城镇居民消费行为研究.经济研究,1994(4),66-72
[106]尉高师,雷明国.求解中国消费之谜——熊彼特可能是对的.管理世界,2003(3),17-22
[107]Karras G.Government spending and private consumption:some international evidence.Journal of Money,Credit and Banking,1994,Vol.26,No.1:9-22
[108]Mackinnon J C.Critical values for cointegration tests,in:Engel R F et al.eds.Longrun Economic Relationships:Readings in Cointegration,Cambridge:Oxford University Press,1991
[109]臧旭恒.居民跨时预算约束与消费函数假定及验证.经济研究,1994(9),51-59
[110]Koyck L M.Distributed lags and investment analysis.Amsterdam:North-Holland Publishing Co.,1954
[111]Zellner A.The short-run consumption function.Econometrica,1957,XXV:552-567
[112]Holbrook R S.Alternative models of consumer behavior:the permanent income hypothesis and the life cycle hypothesis.Ph.D.dissertation,University of California at Berkeley,1965
[113]孙凤,丁文斌.中国消费者的头脑帐户分析.统计研究,2005(2),42-46
[114]贺京同,霍焰.心理会计、公共福利保障与居民消费.财经研究,2007(12),114-127
[115]臧旭恒等.居民资产与消费选择行为分析.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2001
[116]袁志刚,朱国林.消费理论中的收入分配与总消费.中国社会科学,2002(2),69-76
[117]Fudenberg D,Levine D K.A dual-self model of impulse control.American Economic Review,2006,Vol.96:1449-1476
[2]熊必琳,陈蕊,杨善林.中国内需结构分析及增长模式转变.经济与管理研究,2007(7),22-26
[3]凯恩斯.就业、利息和货币通论.高鸿业译.北京:商务印书馆,1999
[4]Duesenberry J S.Income,saving,and the theory of consumer behavior.Cambridge,Mass.Harvard University Press,1949
[5]Modigliani F,Brumberg R.Utility analysis and the consumption function:an interpretation of cross-section data.in:Kurihara K K.ed.Post Keynsian Economics.New Brunswick NJ:Rutgers University Press,1954
[6]Friedman M.A theory of the consumption function.Princeton,N J:Princeton University Press,1957
[7]Hall R E.Stochastic implications of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis:theory and evidence.Journal of Political Economy,1978,86:971-987
[8]Zeldes S P.Consumption and liquidity constraints:an empirical investigation.Journal of Political Economy,1989,97:305-346
[9]Carroll C D.The buffer-stock theory of saving:some macroeconomics evidence.Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,1992,2:61-156
[10]Caroll C D,Kimball M S.On the concavity of consumption function.Econometrica,1996,64(4):981-992
[11]Leland H E.Savings and uncertainty:the precautionary demand for saving.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1968,82:465-473
[12]臧旭恒.中国消费函数分析.上海:上海三联出版社、上海人民出版社,1994
[13]李子奈.计量经济学——方法和应用.北京:清华大学出版社,1992
[14]厉以宁.中国宏观经济的实证分析.北京:北京大学出版社,1992
[15]王信.我国居民收入高增长时期的储蓄存款分析.经济科学,1996(5),24-31
[16]赵志君.我国居民储蓄率的变动和因素分析.数量经济技术经济研究,1998(8),23-26
[17]袁志刚,宋铮.城镇居民消费行为变异与我国经济增长.经济研究,1999(11):20-28
[18]龙志和,周浩明.中国城镇居民预防性储蓄实证研究.经济研究,2000(11),33-38
[19]万广华,张茵,牛建高.流动性约束、不确定性与中国居民消费.经济研究,2001(11),35-45
[20]孟昕,黄少卿.中国城市的失业、消费平滑和预防性储蓄.经济社会体制比较,2001(6),41-51
[21]李实,Knight.中国城市中的三种贫困类型.经济研究,2002(10),47-58
[22]万广华,史清华,汤树梅.转型经济中农户储蓄行为:中国农村的实证研究.经济研究,2001(11),3-12
[23]罗楚亮.经济转轨、不确定性与城镇居民消费行为.经济研究,2004(4),100-106
[24]余永定,李军.中国居民消费函数的理论与验证.中国社会科学,2000(1),123-133
[25]叶海云.试论流动性约束、短视行为与我国消费需求疲软的关系.经济研究,2000(11),39-44
[26]金晓彤,杨晓同.中国城镇居民消费行为变异的四个假说及其理论分析.经济研究,2004(11),5-14
[27]Thaler R H.Mental accounting and consumer choice.Marketing Science,1985,Vol.4,No.3:199-214
[28]Shefrin H M,Thaler R H.The behavioral life-cycle hypothesis.Economy Inquiry,1988,Vol.ⅩⅩⅥ:609-643
[29]Loewenstein G,Prelec D.Anomalies in intertemporal choice:evidence and an interpretation.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992,Vol.107,No.2:573-597
[30]Fisher I.The theory of interest.London:MacMillan,1930
[31]Kuznets S.National income,a summary of findings.NBER paper,1946
[32]Friedman M.Windfalls,the "horizon" and related concepts in the permanent income hypothesis,in:Carl F C.et al.eds.Measurement in Economics:Studies in Mathematical Economics and Econometrics.Stanford,Calif.:Stanford University Press,1963
[33]希克斯.价值与资本.薛蕃康译.北京:商务印书馆,1962
[34]Cagan P.The monetary dynamics of hyperinflation.In:Friedman M ed.Studies in the Quantity Theory of Money.Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1955
[35]Mayer T.Permanent income,wealth,and consumption:a critique of the permanent income theory,the life-cycle hypothesis and related theories.Berkeley:University of California Press,1972
[36]迪顿.理解消费.胡景北,鲁昌译.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2003
[37]Carroll C D.A theory of the consumption function,with and without liquidity constraints.2001,www.econ.jhu.edu/people/carroll/carroll.html
[38]Liviatan N.Errors in variables and Engel cureve analysis.Econometrica,1961,29,No.3:336-362
[39]Mohabbat K A,Simos E V.Consumer horizon:future evidence.The Journal of Political Economy,1977,Vol.85,No.4:851-858
[40]Landsberger M.The consumption function and windfall receipts.Jerusalem:Bank of Israel,Res.Dep.,1970
[41]Flavin M.The adjustment of consumption to changes in expectations about future income.The Journal of Political Economy,1981,Vol.89,No.5:974-1009
[42]Daly V,Hadjimatheou G.Stochastic implications of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis:evidence for the UK economy.Journal of Political Economy,1981,89:596-599
[43]Mankiw N G,Shapiro M.Trends,random walks,and tests of the permanent income hypothesis.Journal of Monetary Economics,1985,16:165-174
[44]Stock J,West K D.Integrated regressors and tests of the permanent income hypothesis. Journal of Monetary Economics,1988,21:85-95
[45]Mankiw N G.Hall's consumption hypothesis and durable goods.Journal of Monetary Economics,1982,10:417-425
[46]Campbell Y,Deaton A.Why is consumption so smooth? Review of Economic Studies,1989,56:357-374
[47]Romer D.Advanced macroeconomics.McGraw-Hill,1996
[48]Carroll C,Summers L H.Consumption growth parallels income growth:some new evidence.NBER Working Paper Series,No.3090,1989
[49]Campbell Y,Mankiw N G.Consumption,income and interest rotes:reinterpreting the time series evidence.In:Blanchard O J,Fischer S eds.NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1989.Cambridge,Mass.MIT Press,1989
[50]Caballero R J.Consumption puzzles and precautionary saving.Journal of Monetary Economics,1990,25:113-136
[51]Dynan K E.How prudent are consumers.Journal of political Economy,1993,Vol.101:1104-1113
[52]Romer D.Advanced macroeeonomics.2~(nd) Ed.McGraw-Hill,2000
[53]Deaton A.Saving and liquidity constraints.Econometrica,1991,59:1221-1248
[54]Carroll C D.Buffer stock saving and the life cycle/permanent income hypothesis.Mimeo,Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,1993
[55]罗楚亮.经济转轨、不确定性与城镇居民消费行为.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2006
[56]Attela V,Rosati F C,Rossi M C.Precautionary saving and health risk:evidence from the Italian households using a time series of cross sections.Mimeo,from Network,2002
[57]贺京同,那艺.传承而非颠覆:从古典、新古典到行为经济学.南开学报(哲社版),2007(2),122-130
[58]哈尔·瓦里安.微观经济学高级教程.周洪等译.北京:经济科学出版社,1997
[59]阿马蒂亚·森.伦理学与经济学.王宇等译.北京:商务印书馆,2000
[60]劳伦斯·A·博兰.批判的经济学方法论.王铁生等译.北京:经济科学出版社,2000
[61]Gale D.Is psychology the future of economics? http://silverdialogues.fas.nyu.edu/docs/,2005
[62]约翰·杜威.哲学的改造.许崇清译.北京:商务印书馆,2002
[63]Freidman M.The methodology of positive economies,in:Assays in Positive Economics.Chicago:University of Chicago press,1953
[64]Benartzi S,Thaler R H.Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,110:73-92
[65]Akerlof G A,Yellen J L.The fair wage-effort hypothesis and unemployment.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1990,105(2):255-83
[66]Wilkinson N.An introduction to behavioral economics.New York:Palgrave Press,2008
[67]Camerer C F,Loewenstein G.Behavioral economies:past,present,future,in:Camerer C F.et al.eds.Advances in Behavioral Economies.Princeton University Press,2004
[68]D'Orlando F,Snfilippo E.Behavioral foundations for the Keynesian consumption function.http://ssrn.com/abstract=961780,2006
[69]Loewenstein G,Thaler R H.Anomalies:intertemporal choice.The Journal of Economic Perspectives,Vol.3,No.4:181-193
[70]Nagel R.Unravelling in guessing games:an experimental study.American Economic Review,1995,85:1313-1326
[71]Grether D.M,Plott,C.Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon.American Economic Review,1979,69(4):623-638
[72]贺京同,那艺.个体行为动机与行为经济学.经济社会体制比较,2007(3),12-18
[73]贺京同,那艺,王晓岚.个体行为研究的异质化演进.经济学动态,2007(2),79-83
[74]Keynes J N.The scope and method of political economy.London:Macmillan,1891
[75]马克斯·韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神.彭强等译.西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2002
[76]Fudenberg D.Advancing beyond 'advances in behavioral economics'.Journal of Economics Literature,2006,Vol.XLIV:694-711
[77]Thaler R H.Mental accounting matters.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,1999,12:183-206
[78]Skinner J.Housing wealth and aggregate saving.NBER Working Paper Series,No.2842,1989
[79]Venti S F,Wise D A.But they don't want to reduce housing equity.NBER Working Paper Series,No.2859,1989
[80]Cagan P.The effect of pension plans on aggregate savings.New York:NBER,1965
[81]Katona G.Private Pensions and individual saving.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1965
[82]King M A,Dicks-Mireaux L D L.Asset holdings and the life cycle.Economic Journal,1982:247-267
[83]Kahneman,D,Tversky A.Prospect theory:an analysis of decision under risk.Econometrica,1979,47:263-291
[84]Thaler R H.Toward a positive theory of consumer choice.Journal of Economics Behavior and Organization,1980,1:39-60
[85]Read D,Loewenstein G,Rabin M.Choice Bracketing.Unpublished Working Paper,Carnegie Mellon University,1998
[86]Strotz R H.Myopia and inconsistency in dynamic utility maximization.Review of Economic Studies,1956,23:165-180
[87]Thaler R H.Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency.Economic Letters,1981,8:201-207
[88]Prelec D,Loewenstein G.Decision making over time and under uncertainty:a common approach.Management Science,1991,Vol.37,No.7:770-786
[89]Ainslie G.Specious reward:a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.Psychological Bulletin,1975,82:463-509
[90]Herrnstein R J.Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement.Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior,1961,4:267-272
[91]Mazur J E.An adjustment procedure for studying delayed reinforcement,in:Commons M L.et al.eds.Quantitative Analysis of Behavior:the Effect of Delay and of Intervening Events on Reinforcement Value,Chapter 2.Ballinger,Hillsdale,NJ,1987
[92]Angeletos G-M,Laibson D,Repetto A,et al.The hyperbolic consumption model:calibration,simulation,and empirical evaluation.Journal of Economic Perspectives,2001,Vol.15,No.3:47-68
[93]Prelec D.Decreasing impatience:definition and consequences.Harvard Business School Working Paper,1989
[94]Peleg B,Yaari M E.On the existence of a consistent course of action when tastes are changing.Review of Economic Studies,1973,XL:391-401
[95]Laibson D.Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,May,1997:443-477
[96]亚当·斯密.道德情操论.蒋自强等译.北京:商务印书馆,1997
[97]Rae J.the Sociological Theory of Capital.London:MacMillan,1834
[98]Bohm-Bawerk E V.The positive theory of capital,translated by Smart V.London:MacMillan,1981
[99]Samuelson P.A note on measurement of utility.Review of Economic Studies,1937,4:155-161
[100]Olson M,Bailey M J.Positive time preference.Journal of Political Economy,1981,89:1-25
[101]Samuelson P.Probability,utility,and the independence axiom.Econometriea,1952,20:4:670-678
[102]McIntosh D.The foundations of human society.Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1969
[103]Thaler R H,Shefrin H M.An economic theory of self-control.Journal of Political Economy,1981,Vol.89,No.2:392-406
[104]中国社会科学院经济研究所居民行为课题组.居民的消费选择与国民经济成长.经济研究,1988(1),26-42
[105]龙志和.我国城镇居民消费行为研究.经济研究,1994(4),66-72
[106]尉高师,雷明国.求解中国消费之谜——熊彼特可能是对的.管理世界,2003(3),17-22
[107]Karras G.Government spending and private consumption:some international evidence.Journal of Money,Credit and Banking,1994,Vol.26,No.1:9-22
[108]Mackinnon J C.Critical values for cointegration tests,in:Engel R F et al.eds.Longrun Economic Relationships:Readings in Cointegration,Cambridge:Oxford University Press,1991
[109]臧旭恒.居民跨时预算约束与消费函数假定及验证.经济研究,1994(9),51-59
[110]Koyck L M.Distributed lags and investment analysis.Amsterdam:North-Holland Publishing Co.,1954
[111]Zellner A.The short-run consumption function.Econometrica,1957,XXV:552-567
[112]Holbrook R S.Alternative models of consumer behavior:the permanent income hypothesis and the life cycle hypothesis.Ph.D.dissertation,University of California at Berkeley,1965
[113]孙凤,丁文斌.中国消费者的头脑帐户分析.统计研究,2005(2),42-46
[114]贺京同,霍焰.心理会计、公共福利保障与居民消费.财经研究,2007(12),114-127
[115]臧旭恒等.居民资产与消费选择行为分析.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2001
[116]袁志刚,朱国林.消费理论中的收入分配与总消费.中国社会科学,2002(2),69-76
[117]Fudenberg D,Levine D K.A dual-self model of impulse control.American Economic Review,2006,Vol.96:1449-1476