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:胡欣 HU Xin(School of Economics and Management,Southeast University,Nanjing,Jiangsu 211189)
出 处:《江苏商论》2025年第4期89-98,共10页Jiangsu Commercial Forum
摘 要:本文通过TVP-VAR模型,以2000—2022年数据为样本,深入研究中国金融周期、房价波动以及货币政策三者之间的传导机制以及联动效应。在此基础上对比分析新冠疫情背景下中国和美国的金融周期走势以及三个变量的动态时变特征。结果发现,三者之间具有明显的时变效应,并在不同滞后期和不同时点下,脉冲响应函数图都表现出较为明显的差异。在2008年之后,中国金融周期在宽松货币政策背景下整体表现出上行趋势,但由于房价泡沫的积累以及新冠疫情的冲击,虽然目前尚未进入拐点,金融周期转向仍应成为中国货币政策制定过程中重点关注的问题。This article uses the TVP-VAR model and takes data from 2000 to 2022 as samples to deeply study the transmission mechanism and linkage effect between China's financial cycle,housing price fluctuations,and monetary policy.On this basis,the financial cycle trend of China and the United States in the context of the COVID-19 epidemic and the dynamic time-varying characteristics of the three variables were analyzed.The results showed that there was a significant time-varying effect among the three,and the impulse response function diagrams exhibited significant differences at different lag periods and time points.After 2008,China's financial cycle showed an overall upward trend in the context of loose monetary policy.However,due to the accumulation of house price foam and the impact of the COVID-19,although it has not yet reached an inflection point,the turning of the financial cycle should still be a major concern in the process of China's monetary policy formulation.
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:3.148.145.200