发展中国家资本账户开放原因浅析

资本账户开放是一国经济对外开放的重要内容, 也是一国经济融入金融全球化和全球经济一体化进 程的具有根本性意义的步骤。发展中国家之所以开放资本账户, 主要是为了:吸引外国资本流入, 促进经济增长; 适应金融自由化改革需要, 推进金融深化;作为结构改革的重要组成部分, 促进宏观经济稳定和可持续发展整体目 标的实现;此外, 资本管制成本不断上升而管制成效却持续下降的压力以及来自于金融竞争强势国家和国际组织 的压力, 也是促使发展中国家开放其资本账户的重要原因。     

浅析发展中国家资本账户开放的前提条件

资本账户开放直接关系到发展中国家的经济稳定与安全, 需要一系列相关经济条件 或配套政策措施与之适应、配合:(1)保持健康的财政及货币状况, 实行弹性的汇率机制, 保持可维 持的国际收支结构;(2)深化金融体制改革, 积极推进国内的金融自由化、金融深化和金融发展, 消 除国内金融体系的扭曲, 大力加强和完善金融监管, 确保金融体系稳健、高效运行;(3)对国内企业 进行系统改革与重组, 按照现代企业制度要求, 建立良好、有效的公司治理结构。     

论拉美国家的金融自由化

90年代以前 ,拉美国家的金融制度明显具有“金融压抑”的特征。拉美有过两次引人注目的金融自由化。第一次金融自由化主要是在智利、阿根廷和乌拉圭等南锥体国家进行的 ,取得了一定的成效。第二次金融自由化始于 80年代末或 90年代初 ,具有以下两个特点 :实施金融自由化的国家几乎遍布整个拉美大陆 ;除在第一次金融自由化时采取的措施以外 ,还采取了对国有银行实施私有化、积极引进外国银行的参与及加强中央银行的独立性等措施。秘鲁是拉美第二次金融自由化“浪潮”的“潮头”。拉美国家实施的金融自由化在一定程度上缓解了“金融压抑”,使拉美国家吸引了大量外资 ,增强了金融机构为投资项目融资的能力。但在推动“金融深化”的过程中也加重了银行部门的脆弱性。金融自由化不是根治金融问题的“灵丹妙药”。急于求成的金融自由化与无效而乏力的政府监管结合在一起 ,会加重金融部门的脆弱性 ,加大爆发银行危机的可能性     

日本金融自由化及启示

日本的金融自由化进程始于 2 0世纪 70年代中后期 ,基本完成于 90年代末。通过分析日本金融自由化的展开过程 ,可以得出如下结论 :经济运行环境的演变是推动金融制度改革及金融自由化的最强大动力 ;渐进式的金融自由化并不能完全有效地规避金融风险 ;金融自由化作为一种管制制度改革的过程 ,必然存在利益格局重建问题 ,所以 ,各种利益主体之间的斗争不可避免 ;在经济全球化的时代 ,国际因素是推动经济体制变革不可忽视的重要力量。     

东盟国家金融自由化与金融危机

７０年代末、８０年代初,东盟国家顺应当时国际、国内经济发展趋势,相继实行以取消银行利率限制、开放金融市场为主要内容的金融自由化改革。但由于东盟国家金融自由化改革速度过快,实施相关措施操之过急,加上国内宏观经济不稳定,从而导致金融秩序出现严重混乱,并最终成为引发东南亚金融危机的主要原因。东盟国家金融自由化,给发展中国家留下的教训是深刻的。一、金融自由化的基本条件金融深化理论是西方经济学界针对发展中国家金融欠发达、金融市场"抑制"而提出的,它主张的金融自由化对增进发展中国家现有金融市场的效率,促进金融…     

东南亚五国金融自由化改革及其借鉴

从７０年代起,拉美和亚洲一些发展中国家开始实施金融自由化改革。相对于拉美国家,东南亚国家的金融改革起步较晚,成效较为显著,曾被誉为一个成功的范例,但终因一些国家改革进程过快和政策失误而陷入严重的金融危机中。从金融自由化到金融危机,东南亚国家的金融改革提供了诸多可资借鉴的经验与教训。一、东南亚金融自由化的进程与措施东南亚五国金融自由化改革,是以西方发展经济学中的"金融深化论"为理论基础,以各国经济发展战略的转型为国内背景,而全球金融自由化的浪潮成为其国际因素。战后,东南亚五国的金融发展与改革大致经历…     

印度银行业改革

印度银行业改革赵薇８０年代以来，随着新兴工业化国家经济实力增强，相继放开金融管制，主要表现在利率自由化，外汇自由化，金融行政管理自由化，，从而掀起一股金融自由化的浪潮。同时发达资本主义国家如美国、日本也在原有基础上进行改革，美国取消了实施达半世纪的《...     

拉美国家金融自由化历程及对中国金融改革的启示

金融自由化的核心是放松利率、汇率和管制, 通过利率水平反映储蓄的稀缺性 和刺激储蓄, 提高投资收益率。金融自由化理论基础为新自由主义, 完全依靠市场机制发挥作 用。这种观点只看到政府对金融体系的干预阻碍了金融与经济的发展, 而忽视了信息不对称情况 下的道德风险和机会主义行为同样会造成金融效率的损失。按照其改革思路实施的激进式金融自 由化以及“休克疗法”, 最终均导致金融秩序的混乱、信用体系的崩溃和金融危机。因此, 金融 自由化是一种手段而不是目的, 经济增长和社会福利的提高才是目的。稳步实施金融自由化, 建 立现代金融体系, 对中国的经济发展具有战略意义。     

论韩国金融自由化和国际化

国际金融发展体现商业化、综合化、国际化趋势，为顺应这一时代潮流，韩国金融业走上自由化和国际化之路。本文深入分析了韩国实行金融自由化和国际化的背景及动因，介绍了在推行自由化和国际化过程中所采取的步骤和措施。在此基础上，预测了韩国金融自由化和国际化的发展趋势，韩元的国际化将是韩国金融全面国际化的标志。     

东盟国家金融自由化的反思

７０年代末、８０年代初以来，在西方国家金融深化理论的影响下，东盟国家①相继采取了放开利率、金融机构引入竞争机制、发展金融市场、取消外汇管制等金融自由化政策。从实际效果来看，由于东盟国家金融自由化改革速度过快，实施相关措施操之过急，加上国内宏观经济不稳定，又未实施相应的配套改革措施，从而导致金融秩序出现混乱，并最终引发波及全球的金融危机，政府被迫重新进行金融管制，致使金融体系深化改革的进程严重受挫。东盟国家金融自由化给发展中国家留下的教训是深刻的。一、金融自由化改革的前提条件金融深化理论是西方经济…     

Capital Account Liberalization,Financial Structure,and Access to Credit in Latin America

This article revisits the question of whether capital account liberalization improves access to credit by advancing and testing a theory of how the structure of the financial sector shapes the willingness and ability of banks and governments to repress the domestic financial sector. In a highly concentrated financial sector, banks and governments are more willing to reap the benefits of financial openness by suppressing liberalizing reforms to domestic financial policies, and they can also better coordinate with one another to stifle these reforms compared to when the financial sector is diffuse. Using a panel dataset of Latin American and Caribbean countries, I find that capital account liberalization leads to a decrease in loans to private firms and households and an increase in loans to governments and state-owned enterprises when the financial sector is highly concentrated. Only when the financial sector is diffuse does capital account liberalization lead to reforms in entry barriers, directed credit programs, and banking sector supervision, which extends to improved access to credit for private firms and households.     

危机后韩国经济面临的困境与出路

目前,韩国的实体经济保持着良好的恢复态势,就业、工资情况有所改善,基本实现了稳定物价的目标,维持经常收支黑字基调,金融市场趋于稳定,金融制度得到改善。但韩国经济面临着对外来冲击缺乏抵抗力,经济过度依赖特定产业,出口集中于少数国家,金融市场结构脆弱,就业的结构性问题加深等一系列的结构性问题,其出路在于采取内需拉动型的稳定增长模式,扩大产业群,构筑韩国特色的灵活安全的就业体系,构建支撑实体经济发展的安全的金融体系。     

Contradictions between economic liberalization and democratization: The case of South Korea

This article examines the relationships between economic liberalization and democratization in South Korea. The two processes are often correlated, but in Korea liberalization has been problematic for democratization. Domestic liberalization initially expanded space for labour organizations, but after they appeared to become too active, the process was so managed as to block political activity. This also resulted from pressures brought on by international liberalization, which made competitive wage costs increasingly important and raised the prospect of disinvestment by Korean and foreign firms. Liberalization has not reduced the power of business (the chaebol). Deregulation and privatization have encouraged a transfer of public economic power to the private sector. The increased political role of business is not necessarily beneficial, and the chaebol's economic power represents a threat to democratization in a variety of ways. In previous decades state power rested on economic controls; and the main impetus for democratization has come from the expansion of civil society through economic development, rather than from economic liberalization. State intervention in the economy may continue to be required to protect the position of certain civil society groups and to control business power, but domestic and international liberalization have challenged both of these functions and may increasingly curtail them in the future. Thus, close examination of the specifics of liberalization in South Korea show no automatic positive correlation can be made between economic and political reform without risking either reductionism or reification.     

建立中韩FTA过程中的农产品贸易安排构想

确定双方均可接受的农产品自由贸易安排,是建立中韩FTA过程中面临的最复杂的挑战之一。从中韩两国农业发展水平和资源禀赋状况看,实现中韩农产品贸易自由化对于中国具有更大的利益,既是中国推动中韩FTA的核心目标之一,也是提高中国农产品在韩国竞争能力及解决双方农产品贸易争端的重要措施。但是,韩国政府对农产品贸易自由化始终持谨慎态度,主要是担心农产品自由贸易可能对其农业产业造成冲击、危及其粮食安全,并带来较大的政治风险。为此,双方应在建立FTA过程中就农产品贸易问题进行积极磋商与谈判,确立起合理的农产品贸易安排,具体内容包括确立农产品贸易自由化的合理范围和时间步骤安排、设置合理保障机制与争端解决机制、建立"最惠国待遇"机制等。     

韩国-东盟服务贸易的发展与自由化

2007年11月，韩国与东盟正式签署了《韩国-东盟全面经济合作构架下服务贸易协议》，这是继《中国-东盟服务贸易协议》之后东盟签署的第二份服务贸易协议。本文拟论述韩国与东盟国家服务贸易的发展水平和国际竞争力的特点，并分析韩国与东盟区域服务贸易自由化的特点和前景。     

中韩农业贸易中的政治性贸易保护问题研究

在中日韩三国自由贸易区谈判即将召开的情况下,韩国农业领域的贸易保护问题已经成为阻碍中韩FTA签订的重要问题。韩国农业领域的贸易保护倾向不仅根源于福利国家体制和国家干预制度,还和韩国独特的历史和现实政治情况紧密关联,这就要求我国政府在解决该问题时除了遵循FTA基本原则外,更要兼顾社会和政治方面的对韩协调,整合中国农业出口部门,实现对农业领域自由贸易的政治护持。     

中、日、韩金融合作与东北亚区域经济发展

东北亚金融合作的滞后已经成为导致区域经济不稳定和制约区域经济合作进一步发展的重要因素。因此 ,加强中、日、韩金融合作 ,为东北亚区域经济合作提供更多的开发资金 ,有效地防范区域金融危机 ,十分必要。从现实的角度来分析 ,中、日、韩金融合作既有坚实的物质基础 ,又有适合的制度基础 ,关键是要解决合作途径的选择和操作问题。从当前中、日、韩之间的合作条件来看 ,比较现实的选择是应积极开展中、日、韩之间的功能性金融合作。从成立东北亚国际开发银行、建立中、日、韩之间的清算支付体系和中、日、韩 3边货币互换机制等方面实施合作。     

Systemic Explanations, Divergent Outcomes: The Politics of FinancialLiberalization in France and Spain

This article challenges the adequacy of prevalent market-driven models of regulatory change, and more specifically, the stipulation that international market integration will lead governments undertaking financial liberalization in formerly interventionist states to carry out adequate market reforms. It does so through an analysis of financial regulation in two European countries: France and Spain. The article offers an integrated historical perspective on regulatory change which suggests that the market-driven convergence thesis does not adequately capture the political dynamic behind financial interventionism and liberalization in the two countries. The introduction of dirigisme and its later-day abandonment were driven less by the "state vs. market” dynamics emphasized in much of the literature than by macroeconomic policy choices on the part of postwar elites. Focusing on similarities and differences in the timing and pattern of reform, the article argues that dirigisme was abandoned in France and Spain not because of changing sectoral pressures or the lack of viability of external controls, but because it raised the political costs of monetary austerity for elected authorities. This link between regulatory choices and the politics of macroeconomic adjustment has implications that are likely to be critical in any country undergoing financial liberalization.     

Whither East Asian economic integration? Korea��s regionalization cum globalization strategy

The recent regionalization in East Asia can be defined in terms of regionalization cum globalization. In the case of Europe, regionalization was originally intended to create a preferential and protected area. From its inception, however, regionalization in East Asia emphasized open membership and global liberalization. This so-called open regionalism was then adopted as a fundamental principle of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Given that APEC is an inter-regional institution, however, the concept of open regionalism is not applicable to characterize exclusively Asian integration process that gained momentum on the basis of the ASEAN + 3 framework. For many East Asian countries, a regionalization initiative, especially after the 1997 financial crisis, was a natural response to cope with globalization. Indeed, although East Asian economies are increasingly regionalized, the global market remains crucial and exclusively Asian arrangements are still rare. Globalization and regionalization processes are mutually reinforcing. Singapore is one example that developed into a regional economic hub through the regionalization cum globalization strategy. Given that Korea concluded recently two important free trade areas with the USA and the EU, Korea is also capable of building such a regional economic hub. The first step is to strengthen a cooperation network between the three Northeast Asian countries, China, Japan, and Korea. This network, together with ASEAN, is expected to catalyze the regional integration in East Asia and shape its future evolution.