检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:李成[1] 李一帆 LI Cheng;LI Yi-fan(School of Economics and Finance,Xi'an Joaotong University,Xi'an 710061,China)
机构地区:[1]西安交通大学经济与金融学院,西安710061
出 处:《云南财经大学学报》2019年第1期38-51,共14页Journal of Yunnan University of Finance and Economics
基 金:国家社会科学基金项目"新形势下货币政策传导缓阻的成因;监测与对策研究"(17BJY193)
摘 要:基于货币总量、工具结构和行政管制的视角,分析货币政策市场化方式和房价管制行政化方式对房地产市场的影响,运用2010年6月至2018年6月百城住宅数据进行城市分级检验。研究发现:货币政策调控房价存在理论和现实的必要,货币政策工具紧缩操作抑制房价上涨;数量型工具调控房价效果优于价格型工具,行政管制间断性导致货币政策和行政管制对房价影响产生方向"差异";货币政策和行政管制调控一、二、三线城市房价的效果逐级递减。From the perspective of monetary aggregates,tool structure and administrative control,this paper analyses the impacts of marketization methods of monetary policy and the housing control administrative means on the real estate market.Housing price data of 100 cities from June 2010 to June 2018 are used for city grading test.The result?proves?that there is a theoretical and practical necessity for monetary policy to regulate housing prices,and tightening monetary policy instruments can curb housing prices.Quantitative tools are better than price tools in regulating housing prices.Intermittent administrative control leads to the direction difference between monetary policy and administrative regualtion.The effect of monetary policy and administrative control on regulating housing price in first-tier,second-tier and third-tier cities decreases gradually.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15