【作者】 杨汝亭；

【导师】 胡钧；

【作者基本信息】 中国人民大学 ， 政治经济学， 2010， 博士

【副题名】基于国际比较的视点

【摘要】 金融业是现代经济的核心,一个良好运行的金融体系所具有的融通资金、节约流通费用、资本积聚、资源配置、风险分散等功能对社会生产具有重要的促进作用。金融业发展水平及其运行状态直接关系到一个国家经济体系的健康与否,是一国经济发展水平的重要标志。同时金融业也蕴含着巨大的风险,现实中金融危机往往成为引发经济危机的导火索和危机的主要表现形式。从现象上看,政府对金融实施监管的主要目标在于防范和消除金融风险、维护金融业的稳定,不可否认这是金融监管最为直接和一般的目标,但仅仅认识到这一点是远远不够的。金融监管作为政府管理金融、调控经济的重要手段,其作用在维护金融的稳定目标之外,还有更为广泛的政治和经济意图。本文选取美国、德国和日本作为样本,从政府行为的角度研究各国金融监管的差异,回顾了这三个国家金融监管的形成及演变,在监管目标、监管模式、安全网设置、危机救助等具体的政策选择方面进行了较为详细的阐述和比较,总结了政府金融监管行为的特点。通过分析我们发现,尽管世界各国都致力于提高金融监管的有效性,但各国政府在实施具体的金融监管行为上却有着明显的不同。原因是多方面的,既有政治体制的原因,也有经济发展水平和文化传统的原因。正是这些因素的综合作用推动了一国金融监管制度的形成与演变,同时,也只有充分考虑到这些因素才有可能造就成功的金融监管。对我国而言,经过改革开放以来三十年的发展,金融业在市场规模、行业结构、资本构成、业务种类等方面都发生了巨大变化,伴随这一过程金融监管也不断完善。在具体的金融监管实践中,我国金融机构的国有化控制、隐性存款保险、危机救助等方面都和西方国家存在较大差异。尽管在这些监管方法是否制约了金融业的效率、提高了金融监管的成本、助长了金融业的道德风险方面还有待进一步讨论,但是在这三十年中我国的金融业没有出现大的风险,经济也保持了持续快速平稳的增长,这说明我国的金融监管在总体上是成功的。但是,这些成就并不能掩盖我国金融监管中存在的不足,比如法律体系不完善、监管手段和方法落后、监管中的人为性和随意性、政府过度干预金融业的经营、监管人员业务能力不足、监管中的腐败等等。而且,随着全球经济和金融一体化的进程以及我国经济市场化改革的深入,金融业所面临的内外部环境都将发生巨大变化,金融风险在形成方式、传递途径以及破坏力方面都将和以往有很大的不同。如何充分借鉴国外金融监管的先进经验并有效结合我国的客观现实,不断改进监管方法,提高监管的效率,使金融监管在维护金融稳定的基础上成为促进经济发展的强有力工具将是我国金融监管研究的重大课题。我国所进行的市场化改革,目的在于消除原有体制下不利于效率提高的弊端,而不是社会主义制度本身,我们必须要防止矫枉过正的倾向。我国的现实已经说明,社会主义制度是维护公众对金融业的信心、保持金融稳定的重要保证,坚持社会主义制度是我国政治体制改革的基本原则,而充分发挥社会主义制度的优越性则是我国金融监管必须加以坚持的正确的方向。这是我国金融监管的特点和优势,而不应该成为改革的对象。我国的金融监管就是要通过相关制度的约束,使金融业在国家的引导下健康发展,更好地服务于经济建设。更多还原

【Abstract】 Financial industry is the core of the modern economy, so a well-run financial system with functions of intermediating funds, saving distribution costs, accumulating capitals, allocating resources, dispersing risks and so on, has an important role in promoting social production. The level of financial sector development and its operational status are directly related to the health of a country’s economic system, and both of these are important indicators of a country’s economic development. At the same time, there are many significant risks in the financial industry, and the financial crisis often becomes a cause and a major manifestation of the economic crisis. Viewing from the phenomenon, the main objectives of the government regulation on the financial industry are preventing, eliminating financial risk, and maintaining the stability of the financial sector, and there is no denying that these are the most direct and general objectives of financial regulation, but just realizing this is not enough. Financial regulation is an important mean of the financial management and the economic regulation, and it has a role in maintenance of financial stability, as well as in the broader political and economic intents.With the samples of the United States, Germany and Japan, this paper studies the differences in financial regulation from the perspective of government behaviors, and reviews the formation and evolution of financial regulation of these three countries, and compares the details of three countries in the goals of monitoring, monitoring mode, the settings of the safety net, crisis assistance and other specific policy options, and sums up the characteristics of government financial regulation. Through the analysis we find that, although countries in the world are committed to improving the effectiveness of financial regulation, the behaviors of governments in the implementation of specific financial regulatory are significantly different. There are many reasons, such as the political system, the level of economic development and the cultural tradition. It is a combination of these factors contributed to the formation and the evolution of a country’s financial regulatory system, so it is impossible to create a successful financial regulation without taking these factors into account fully.For our country, after three decades of development since the reform and opening up, the financial sector has great changes in the market size, industry structure, capital structure, business types and so on, and the financial regulation system has built and improved with this process. In the specific practice of financial regulation, we are very different with western countries in the control over the nationalization of financial institutions, the implicit deposit insurance, the crisis relief and other aspects. There are still controversies whether these regulatory approaches constrain the efficiency of the financial industry, improve the financial costs, and increase the moral hazard of financial sector, but in these three decades, China’s financial industry hasn’t a major risk, and the economy has maintained a sustained, rapid and stable growth, which shows that China’s financial regulation is successful in general.However, these achievements can’t cover up the shortcomings of China’s financial regulation, such as imperfect legal system, backward regulatory tools and methods, artificial and arbitrary in monitoring, excessive government intervention in the operation of financial sector, the supervising officer lacked operational capacity, corruptions in monitoring and so on. Moreover, as the global economic and financial integration process, as well as China’s market economy reform, the internal and external environment financial sector faced will undergo great changes, and financial risks will be very different in the way of formation, transmission channels and destructive aspects. These are major issues of China’s financial regulation research to learn the advanced experience of foreign financial regulation, combine of the objective reality of our country effectively, improve the supervisory approach continuously, improve the efficiency of regulation, and then make the financial regulation become a powerful tool for promoting economic development in the base of maintaining financial stability.Finance arose from the process of serving for real economics, service function is the value of his existence. It is no significance that emphasizing on improving operating efficiency but overlooking the service function of finance. From the current development condition of finance, however, the pursuit for efficiency of own often weaken it’s service function. Under the socialist system, financial regulation must restrain and guide the development direction of finance and correct the direction when it departure from the social efficiency, so that, making financial innovation to be an effective tool of improving resource allocation, not the object of speculation, making financial function of intermediation and allocation of funds truly serve the real economics construction and development.Market-oriented reforms that carried out in China aim at eliminating the disadvantages impeded the efficiency in old system, not the socialist system itself, so we have to prevent the tendency of over-correction. The reality in China has explained that socialist system is an important guarantee to protect the public’s confidence in the financial industry and maintain financial stability, so uphold the socialist system is a basic principle of China’s political system, and financial regulation in China must be adhered to the right direction that make the best use of the superiority of the socialist system. These are features and advantages in China’s financial regulation, not the targets of reform. China’s financial regulation must make the financial industry that constrained with institutions develop healthfully under the government guidance, and then serve the economic construction better.更多还原