不同货币政策工具选择与有效性分析——以价格型和数量型为例

发布时间：2018-04-14 11:29

本文选题：价格型工具 + 数量型工具　；参考：《大连理工大学学报(社会科学版)》2017年01期

【摘要】：通过对有关货币政策工具孰优孰劣的争论及现代发展历程回顾总结,构建新凯恩斯主义动态随机一般均衡模型,并结合现有研究成果与中国1995年至2014年季度数据对参数校准修正。研究发现:面对1单位标准差货币政策冲击时,产出与通货膨胀对价格型工具的动态响应程度高于数量型工具,但响应时滞小于后者;分别面对1单位标准差技术、消费和投资冲击时,价格型工具调控下产出与通货膨胀整体能在较短时期内做出调整并趋于稳态水平;相对而言,价格型工具进行宏观调控造成的社会福利损失低于数量型工具。从保持宏观经济稳定运行和社会福利角度出发,价格型货币政策工具有效性优于数量型货币政策工具。中央银行应坚持价格型工具为主,数量型工具为辅,适度扩大价格型工具的调控频率与空间。
[Abstract]:Based on the argument about the superiority of monetary policy tools and the review of modern development process, a new Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model is constructed.Combined with the existing research results and the quarterly data of China from 1995 to 2014, the calibration of the parameters is corrected.It is found that the dynamic response of output and inflation to price instruments is higher than that of quantitative instruments, but the response delay is smaller than that of quantitative instruments, and the response delay is smaller than that of the latter, and the response time delay is lower than that of the latter, respectively, when facing the impact of monetary policy of 1 unit standard deviation,During consumption and investment shocks, output and inflation as a whole can be adjusted and stabilized in a relatively short period of time under the control of price instruments; relatively speaking,The loss of social welfare caused by price-based tools is lower than that of quantitative tools.From the point of view of maintaining macroeconomic stability and social welfare, the effectiveness of price monetary policy tools is better than that of quantitative monetary policy instruments.The central bank should insist on price-based tools supplemented by quantitative tools and expand the frequency and space of price-based instruments.
【作者单位】：西安交通大学经济与金融学院;
【分类号】：F123.16

【参考文献】