摘要
文章基于中国2005年一季度到2013年四季度最新数据,结合货币政策工具选择的新动向,通过建立面板向量自回归(PVAR)模型,使用脉冲响应函数分析方法,对不同类型的货币政策工具(数量型和价格型)对中国不同区域(东、中、西三大经济地带)使用可能带来的差异进行了经验检验与测度。结果表明:三大经济带产出对数量型货币政策工具冲击响应的敏感度按东中西递减;中部经济带价格相对东西部经济带对价格型工具利率更为敏感,三大经济带价格对以利率为代表的价格型工具冲击的响应的差异不明显;汇率工具在各经济带间响应存在明显差异,敏感度和强度随东中西递减。最后文章还提出了相关建议。
In this paper, based on a quarter of 2005 to the fourth quarter of 2013, the most recent data of China, under the new trend of combination of monetary policy tools selection, through the establishment of a panel vector autoregressive （PVAR） model, using the impulse response function analysis method, different types of monetary policy tools （quantity and price based on different regions of China, and three major economic zones） use may be brought about by the difference of the experience of inspection and measurement. The results showed that： three economic belts output for quantitative tools of monetary policy shock response sensitivity according to the east and western economic belt relative price decline; Middle Eastern Economic Belt on the price type tools is more sensitive to differences in response rates, and three economic belts of price type tools to interest rates as the representative of the impact is not obvious; exchange tool in the economic zone axe obvious differences between the response, sensitivity and strength with the West and East decline. Finally, the article also puts forward related suggestions.
出处
《工业技术经济》
北大核心
2015年第1期91-99,共9页
Journal of Industrial Technological Economics
