【作者】 张东奎；

【导师】 李俊江；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 世界经济， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 20世纪的最后30年是金融自由化浪潮席卷全球的时期，利率市场化是这一自由化浪潮中最为核心的改革任务。在这30年中，许多不同发展水平的国家和地区都以不同的方式实践着利率市场化改革，但是收到的效果却表现出两种截然不同的状态。发达国家与新兴经济体国家和地区普遍成功完成了利率市场化改革，有效的促进了本国经济发展。但是在发展中国家里，一部分国家能够基本顺利地完成利率市场化改革，而另一部分国家则成为了改革失败的典型案例。由此可见，利率市场化改革的目标和任务是相同的，但是其改革的效果却在不同国家和地区中表现出巨大的差异，这意味改革的过程中存在着难以把控的种种矛盾，如果能够顺利解决这些矛盾将有利于利率市场化的成功实现，而如果不能顺利解决这些矛盾将可能导致矛盾升级为冲突而最终拖累整体经济发展。为了选择更具代表性和借鉴性的研究对象，本文将研究目标锁定在东亚经济体，通过研究日本、韩国、中国台湾、新加坡、泰国、马来西亚和印度尼西亚等7个经济体的利率市场化改革，发现其中的共同点和差异性，为中国利率市场化改革提供有益参考。本文在对东亚经济体利率市场化改革的研究中使用了历史归纳法和比较分析法，从纵向角度分别对每个经济体利率市场化的过程和作用进行了有侧重性的梳理，而后从横向角度对东亚经济体利率市场化的异同点进行了比较，得到了具有参考意义的分析结果。研究发现，东亚经济体在利率市场化改革中表现出了四个方面的共同点：一是改革动因的相似性，即改革前严格的利率管制束缚了各经济体的经济发展，市场对效率与公平的追求形成了对利率放开的客观要求。为了满足这种客观要求，东亚经济体的货币当局不得不采取利率市场化改革措施以适应经济发展。二是改革有利于东亚经济体宏观经济稳定，即通过各经济体实际GDP年均增长率的变动情况可以看出其经济在改革开始前后基本保持了总体稳定的发展态势。三是改革有利于东亚经济体控制通货膨胀，即在利率市场化改革改革后各经济体的通货膨胀率都较改革前有了明显的降低，且除特殊年份外总体都保持了比较稳定的波动状态。四是改革有利于东亚经济体金融市场的发展，即改革使各经济体金融市场的竞争性提高，金融机构创新能力增强，金融创新产品增加，金融系统对实体经济的支持能力提升。由于各经济体的环境与政策导向不同，利率市场化改革在东亚7个经济体中表现出了一定的差异性。这些差异性表现在：第一，东亚各经济体进行利率市场化改革时的宏观经济环境不同，日本、韩国、中国台湾和新加坡在改革前是宏观经济比较稳定、经济积累比较充实，制度建设比较完善的经济体。泰国、马来西亚和印度尼西亚在改革前的宏观经济不够稳定、经济积累有限且制度建设不足。第二，东亚各经济体利率市场化改革的实践模式不同。日本、韩国、中国台湾、泰国和马来西亚的利率市场化改革都持续了10-20年的时间，属于渐进式改革。新加坡和印度尼西亚利率市场化改革的持续时间非常短，属于激进式改革。第三，东亚各经济体利率市场化改革的经济效果不同。日本、韩国、泰国印度尼西亚在利率市场化改革完成之后的宏观经济波动较大，中国台湾、新加坡和马来西亚是在利率市场化改革完成之后经济发展比较稳定的三个国家。通过分析东亚经济体利率市场化改革的异同点，本文得到了三个方面的经验教训：第一，利率市场化改革的时机选择会关系到改革的成与败。韩国和马来西亚等经济体的改革实例证明当一国或地区宏观经济现状不利于利率市场化改革时，强行实施改革只会造成宏观经济的进一步恶化，使得利率水平短时期内大幅度上扬或剧烈波动，引发物价水平不合理波动且阻碍国民经济增长，迫使货币当局不得不重新实施利率管制，利率市场化最终以失败告终。中国台湾和新加坡等经济体的改革实例则证明了良好的宏观经济环境有利于改革的成功完成。第二，利率市场化与金融产品创新的互动与改革成功与否关系密切，利率市场化改革会促进金融产品创新的增加，而金融创新产品的增多反过来也会推动改革的顺利完成。第三，利率市场化与金融监管的协调关系到改革的效果。新加坡、中国台湾和马来西亚等经济体对监管的充分实施使其改革的过程比较顺利、改革后的经济效果也相对较好，而日本和韩国等经济体在监管方面的缺失则在金融系统中埋下了危机的隐患。中国自1996年以来正式实施利率市场化改革，银行间同业拆借利率首先得到放开，银行间债券市场和票据市场随即开始放松利率管制，促进中国资金市场供求失衡状况得到有效改善。与此同时，关于存贷款利率的市场化改革也遵循着先大额、后小额，先外币、后本币，先贷款、后存款的顺序稳步推进。目前，中国利率市场化改革已完成了大部分内容，接下来的关键问题体现在存款利率上限和贷款利率下限的管制领域。中国利率市场化改革的内在逻辑体现为“增量改革”特征，这与中国经济经济体制改革的特点相一致，表现为体制外的新生力量形成的新体制迂回改造旧体制的革新，即在既定框架下的市场化推进。中国利率市场化改革对宏观经济中储蓄、消费和投资的拉动作用并未突现出来。储蓄的利率弹性、消费的利率弹性和投资的利率弹性难以表现出来，即利率变化对储蓄、消费和投资的理论影响作用不明显。导致这种现象的原因在于利率市场化改革的不完全性和特殊的国内国际经济形势。中国未来利率市场化改革的内容将围绕放开存款利率上限、贷款利率下限和建立有效的基准利率等方面展开，而关系改革能否顺利完成的关键问题在于与改革相关的配套机制的完善过程，这些机制突出体现在市场竞争机制、产品定价机制、监督管理机制和社会舆论机制等四个方面。更多还原

【Abstract】 Financial liberalization has sweeped the world in the last30years of the20thcentury, and interest rate marketization was the most central reform in this wave ofliberalization. During those30years, many contires and regions from different levelsof development has practised the reform of interest rate maketization, and receivedtwo very different kinds of results. Developed and emerging economies generallysucceed in the reform, and improved theire domestic economy effectively. While indeveloping economies, some got succeed in the reform of interest rate marketization,and the others failed. Thus, though the objects and tasks are similar, the results aredifferent in each economy, which means there are lots of problems in the reform tocontrol. If one economy could resolve these problems, its whole economy wouldbecome better; if not, its financial market may be a drag on its whole economy. Inorder to select the more representative objects for the study, this article takes focuson the East Asian economies, including Japan, Korea, Taiwan Province, Singapore,Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. By studing these seven economies’ interest ratemarketization, we find the similarities and differences, which provide a usefulreference for China’s reform.In this article, historical and comparative analysis methods are used to researchthe reform of interest rate marketization. The study finds four common grounds inEast Asian economies’ interest rate marketization. Firstly, the motivations are similarduring these econmies. Strict contrl of interest rates in the pre-reform constrained thedevelopment of economies, market needs efficiency and fairness. In order to meetthese objective requirements, goverments of East Asian had to adopt market-orientedinterest rate reform measures to adapt to economic development. Secondly, reform ofinterest rate marketization is good for macroeconomic stability. It can be seen form the changes of average annual growth rate of real GDP in each economy that thedevelopment before and after the reform are steady. Thirdly, reform is good tocontrol inflation in East Asian economies. After the reform of interest ratemaketization, the economies’ inflation rate were lower in the pre-reform pierod, andstayed steady unless some special years. Forthly, reform is propitious to the financialmarket development of East Asian economies. It can improve the competitive abilityof financial markets, and it can also bring more financial innovations. The wholefinancial system could be better because of the reform.Due to the economic and policy environment are different in these7economies,there are some differences in their reforms of interest rate maketization. The firstdifference is that the macroeconomic environments vary. Macroeconomicenvironment before reform are steadier in Japan, Korea, Taiwan Province andSingapore. They have a more substantial economic accumulation to build relativelycomplete system economies. Macroeconomic environment were not steady enoughbefore the reform of interest rate marketization in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia.They didn’t have enough accumulation and were weak in financial system. Thesecond difference is East Asian economies had different practice modes of interestrate marketization. The reforms of interst rate marketization in Japan, Korea, TaiwanProvince, Thailand and Malaysia have lasted10-20years, belonging to the gradualmodel. Reforms in Singapore and Indonesia are much shorter, belonging to theradical model. The third difference is that economic effects of interest ratemarketization are different among East Asian Economies. Macroeconomy fluctuatedin Japan, Korea, Thailand and Indonesia after the reforms of interest ratemarketization. But macroeconomy developed steadly in Taiwan Province, Singaporeand Malaysia after the reforms.By analyzing the similarities and differences of East Asian economies’ interestrate marketization, there are three experiences and lessons. Firstly, the timing ofinterest rate marketization is related to the successes and failures of the reforms.Reforms in Korea and Malaysia prove that it is not a wise choice to take the reform of interest rate marketization when macroeconomic situation is not ready. Theimposition of reform will only cause further deterioration of the macroeconomy,cause interest rate fluctuate in a short time, lead price level unreasonable fluctuateand force the government to re-control the fiancianl market. Reforms in TaiwanProvince and Singapore prove that favorable macroeconmic environment isimportant to the success of interest rate marketization. Secondly, the interactionbetween interest rate marketization and financial innovation is closely related to thesuccess of the reform. The reform of interest rate marketization will promote theinnovation of financial products, and financial innovation will promote the reform inturn. Thirdly, the harmonization of interest rate marketization and financialsupervision is relative to the effects of this reform. Governments of Singarpore,Taiwan Province and Malaysia take full implementation of supervision to the market,and help their reforms have smooth processes and effects. While the lack ofgovernment supervision in Japan and Korea plant the hidden crisis in their financialsystems.China began its formal implementation of interest rate marketization reform inthe year of1996. Inter-bank leading rates first got released; interest rate of inter-bankbond and paper market got released next. Depending on these measures, capitalsupply and demand has been effectively improved in China. At the same time,deposit and lending rates marketization follow the step of from large-sum transationsto small-sum trasactions, from foreign currency to local currency, from loan todeposit. At present, the reform of interest rate marketization in China has completedmost of the content. The next key issue locates in the area of deposit and lendingrates. The inner logic of China’s reform of interest rate marketization is incrementalreform, which is consistent with the characteristics of China’s economic reform. Thenew force outside the system makes a detour to rebuild the old system. The effects tomacroeconomic saving, consumption and investment did not come to the force inChina’s reform. Changes in interest rates on saving, consumption and investment arenot obvious. The causes of these phenomena are the incomplete of the reform and the special situation of domestic and international economic. Future reform in Chinawill focus on the release of deposit interest rate ceiling, lending rate lower limit andbuilding an effective system of benchmart interest rate. The key problem of the nextreform is to improve the reform-related support mechanisms, such as marketcompetition mechanism, product pricing mechanism, supervision and managementmechanism, and social opinon mechanism.更多还原