新地缘政治经济框架的建模与模拟
|
摘要
随着世界经济一体化的发展,国家间的经济联系变得越来越紧密,相互的影响也越来越大,这也使得经济危机在全球的传导性得到不断的加强。2008年以来的美国金融危机,让整个世界都受到震荡。危机对世界各国产生的不同程度的冲击,并不断的改变着世界,也改变着当今的国际政治经济格局。
为了应对这种经济危机引发的新地缘政治经济博弈,我们需要更深的认识经济危机产生及传导机制,并把握新地缘政治经济博弈的运行规则。在地缘政治结构理论框架下,本文划分出三种不同类型的国家：金融业主导国、制造业主导国与资源供应业主导国,简称金融业国、制造业国和资源业国。通过构建相应的模型体系,模拟认识经济危机的产生及其传导机制,并探析地缘政治经济的重要博弈工具——关税及汇率——的作用机理。这对于中国应对经济危机,在新地缘政治经济博弈中掌握主动权,都有着重要的理论及现实意义。为此,本文在新地缘政治经济框架下展开经济危机的模拟研究。
全文共分六章。
第一章引论。从地缘政治经济理论的演化入手,探讨地缘政治经济的发展过程及新地缘政治经济结构的形成。在此基础上,分析经济危机与地缘政治经济的关系,强调在新地缘政治经济框架下研究经济危机的重要性,并引出地缘政治经济博弈的两个重要经济工具——关税与汇率。通过对关税、汇率与经济增长的相关文献综述的研究发现,单维国度的汇率与经济关系的研究,不能提供汇率工具在国际间复杂经济联系下的作用机理,不足以为复杂的多国间地缘政治经济博弈提供更为全面的参考。这就需要在现实的地缘政治经济框架下构建模型,探讨其作用机制。而博弈论研究框架下的关税同盟的理论又缺乏经济动力学基础。新经济地理学的兴起,正好为构建多区域的模型提供了一个模型框架,然而新经济地理学的模型又缺乏一般均衡理论所能提供的经济动力学机制。于是便引出本文将新经济地理学构架引入一般均衡理论的经济动力学的模型构建思路。
第二章,模型的构建及其分析系统的实现。对于本文三国经济增长模拟模型的具体构建,参考了新经济地理学(NEG)的构架,在Pfluger(2004)及Yamamoto(2008)的研究基础上,将两国扩展为三国,引入汇率与关税,同时为了表征新地缘政治经济框架下的三种类型国家,又将制造业的生产函数扩展成三要素CES形式。进一步,本文又将NEG框架与一般均衡理论相结合,通过政府的引入,从而实现对经济危机的动力学模型构建。在模型构建的基础上,采用C#与Matlab联合编程对经济危机的模拟进行系统实现。对于模型的最优化算法核心部分,采用Matlab编写,并通过C#实现调用接口进行运算。进而,运用模拟系统进行了相关的经济危机模拟。
第三章,汇率变动对各国经济影响的情景模拟。模拟发现,无论是金融业国,制造业国,还是资源业国,只要有这个国家本身参与的贬值情景,其经济增长与就业状况就会有所改善；没有这个国家参与的贬值情景,其经济增长与就业状况则会出现不同程度的降低。制造业国的汇率变化更容易发挥影响力,资源业国则更容易受到汇率变化的影响,金融业国则没什么影响力也不大容易受到别国汇率变化的影响。另外,汇率调整是一把双刃剑,任何贬值可以带来就业与产出的增加,却会降低本国居民的人均消费量；升值会带来就业与产出的降低,却会提高本国居民的人均消费水平。
第四章,关税变化对各国的经济影响。结果发现,对任意国家增收关税,并不能带来本国经济或就业情况的改善,反而会导致被增收国经济与就业状况的恶化。任何国家都有进行报复性关税的意愿,因为这样会减少因被对方增收关税所带来的经济损害。另外,在关税的地缘政治经济博弈中,金融业国拥有绝对的话语权,只有制造业国与资源业国的联合应对才能对其构成影响；制造业国无法与金融业国抗衡,但其对资源业国又有着绝对的话语权；资源业国在关税博弈中处于完全的劣势,但其可以通过与他国的联合应对,以谋求自身的经济利益。
第五章,经济危机情景模拟。结果显示,随着金融业国信贷的不断透支,最终会引爆金融业国消费能力大幅下滑,带来全球经济危机。汇率与关税上的政治博弈并不能从根本上改善经济,要提高居民消费能力,扩大需求,才是走出危机的核心动力。另外,资源的约束对经济增长有着制约作用,加大资源约束力度,会延缓各国经济的增长步伐,而制造业国更容易受到影响。同时,随着资源约束的加大,制造业国受金融业国带来的经济危机影响的风险也越大。而对资源价格的干预,降低金融业国与制造业国获得资源的价格水平,会在资源约束的基础上进一步延缓各国经济的发展,并加大各国就业、产出及消费变化的波动性,加速经济危机的到来。
特别值得一提的是,针对欧美强迫人民币升值的问题,本文就制造业国被迫提高汇率的情景进行了模拟。制造业国货币升值会带来制造业国就业的下降,但实际上,由于汇率的双刃剑的作用,在危机爆发后,制造业国实施汇率升值所带来的就业损失小于平时升值带来的就业损失,而所能带来的居民消费增加却高于平时。另外,加大政府公共产品的供给,并通过补贴等转移支付手段提高居民消费能力,将有助于降低汇率升值带来的风险。因此,制造业国借危机后的汇率升值,提高本国居民消费水平,同时又通过国内相关政策调整来消除汇率升值带来的就业率损失,这不失为一种选择。
With the integration of global economy, the economic link among countries becomes more and more inseparable as well as the interaction, both of which contribute to the spread of financial crisis. The American financial crisis begins at 2008 shakes the whole world. Obviously, financial crisis assaults countries in various degrees which in turn affect the world's political and economic patterns.
In order to be ready for challenges from Geopolinomic, we have to understand the essence of financial crisis and its transmission mechanism, moreover, the grasp of the operation rules of new Geopolinomic is also indispensable. A new Geopolinomical frame is set up by this paper:there are three region types, namely financial centralized region, resources centralized region and manufacturing centralized region, shortly financial countries, resources countries and manufacturing countries. This paper simulates the occurrence of financial crisis and learns about its transmission mechanism by the construction of corresponding model system. Besides, tariff and exchange rate—important game tool when talking about Geopolinomic--are also considered. This paper is a useful reference for China to enact its strategy in facing up to financial crisis and take the initiative in the new Geopolinomical games.This paper is divided into 6 sections.
The first part is introduction. This paper started at evolution of Geopolinomic, analyzed the correlation of financial crisis and Geopolinomic, strengthened the importance of the new frame and discussed how the two important tools—tariff and exchange rate—contribute to Geopolinomic games. Reviewing of literatures referred to tariff, exchange rate and economic growth, one country study cannot clarify the mechanism of tariff and exchange rate under complex global economic links and provide an overview of international Geopolinomic. Besides, the tariff custom union under game theory lacks in economic dynamics. A new model is in urgent need. The new economics geography comes up with a frame for multi-region modeling while it lacks in economics dynamics which can be supplemented by General Equilibrium Theory. These are the reasons why this paper brings in economics dynamics model based on the General Equilibrium Theory.
The second paragraph specified the construction of modeling and its analysis system. The three-country economics growth modeling in this paper is following NEG as well as extending two countries to three countries based on the study of Pfluger(2004) and Yamamoto(2008) and bringing in tariff and exchange rate. In order to present the three-type-country frame, the manufacturing functions were expanded to a three elements CES production functions. Moving forward, this paper combined NEG with General Equilibrium Theory and added government function to make up dynamics modeling in financial crisis. Based on the model, a computer system is constructed using C# and Matlab. As for the kernel, this paper used Matlab platform; to the interface, C# is used. After all, this paper simulated financial crisis successfully.
The third part simulates the fluctuation of exchange rate's influence on countries. As long as we concern, the employment rate will increase when a country takes part in devaluation no matter what type it belongs to. On the other side, the participation of other countries weakens the former's employment increment while the ones failing participation see the growth in employment whose result is influenced by the amount of participation countries. Besides, the financial centralized countries observe a relatively less impact of devaluation on their employment rate; the manufacturing centralized countries would be heavily affected by the devaluation while resource centralized countries are much sensitive to it register as the vibrant in employment rate. Another point is that financial centralized countries have least influence on other countries considering the change of rate; as to manufacturing centralized countries which has a mid-level force in the reaction of other countries to its mutative rate experience a greatest impact on employment rate; after all resource centralized countries influenced other countries most on their response to employment rate. To put it frankly, given employment rate, manufacturing centralized countries play a most important role while resource centralized countries are easily disturbed by others, besides, we do not see much can the financial centralized countries do. In addition, regulation of exchange rate has two sides:devaluation brings in increase of employment and output while decreasing annual consumption domestic; rise in value causes decrease in employment and output while increasing consumption.
In the fourth section, this paper dealt with the impact on Economics of different countries caused by tariff. The result was no improvements observed by increasing others ' tariff while worsen others' employment situation. Every country prefers retaliatory tariff for its probability of lessening the financial harm caused by others. Increasing tariff unilaterally could initiate chain reaction of retaliatory tariff which results from diffuse of trade protectionism. Besides, in tariff games, financial centralized countries represent strong voice and only the cooperation of manufacturing centralized countries and resource centralized countries can make sense; manufacturing centralized countries cannot counterbalance financial centralized countries while they have advantages than resource centralized countries; resource centralized countries are the disadvantaged group only relying on the collaboration of others can them hold on economy interests.
Last but not the least, this paper simulated a financial crisis. With the continuing overdraw of financial credit in financial centralized countries, their consuming capacity slide downward to a large extent and financial crisis occurs. Political games on exchange rate and tariff cannot better economics and improve citizens'consuming capacity by the root. The core power of eliminating crisis is to expand demand and strengthen consuming capacity domestic. Besides, resources influence economic growth. The heavier the restrictions are, the slower of countries' economic growth is, especially the manufacturing ones. At the meantime, the risks forcing on manufacturing countries by financial countries become bigger with the severe restriction of resources. On the other hand, the interfere of resources prices, which means the decrease of manufacturing countries'and financial countries' imported resources' price level, would further retard all countries economic development and fluctuate their employment, output and consume level which result in a faster approach of financial crisis.
Be worth mentioning, as for the compel to appreciation of RMB exchange rate around Occident, this paper using manufacturing centralized countries'constrained increase of exchange rate scenario to simulate a crisis. Due to the exchange rate influence, manufacturing countries' decrease in employment is less than that caused by rise in value when financial crisis happens while has the opposite impact on annual consumption. In a word, the increase in its exchange rate would ameliorate economy situation in financial centralized countries and resource centralized countries with the harm forced down manufacturing centralized countries. Faced up to it, the manufacturing centralized countries'governments should enlarge their supply of public product and improve citizens'consuming capacity by transfer payment such as allowance to let the damage down.
为了应对这种经济危机引发的新地缘政治经济博弈,我们需要更深的认识经济危机产生及传导机制,并把握新地缘政治经济博弈的运行规则。在地缘政治结构理论框架下,本文划分出三种不同类型的国家：金融业主导国、制造业主导国与资源供应业主导国,简称金融业国、制造业国和资源业国。通过构建相应的模型体系,模拟认识经济危机的产生及其传导机制,并探析地缘政治经济的重要博弈工具——关税及汇率——的作用机理。这对于中国应对经济危机,在新地缘政治经济博弈中掌握主动权,都有着重要的理论及现实意义。为此,本文在新地缘政治经济框架下展开经济危机的模拟研究。
全文共分六章。
第一章引论。从地缘政治经济理论的演化入手,探讨地缘政治经济的发展过程及新地缘政治经济结构的形成。在此基础上,分析经济危机与地缘政治经济的关系,强调在新地缘政治经济框架下研究经济危机的重要性,并引出地缘政治经济博弈的两个重要经济工具——关税与汇率。通过对关税、汇率与经济增长的相关文献综述的研究发现,单维国度的汇率与经济关系的研究,不能提供汇率工具在国际间复杂经济联系下的作用机理,不足以为复杂的多国间地缘政治经济博弈提供更为全面的参考。这就需要在现实的地缘政治经济框架下构建模型,探讨其作用机制。而博弈论研究框架下的关税同盟的理论又缺乏经济动力学基础。新经济地理学的兴起,正好为构建多区域的模型提供了一个模型框架,然而新经济地理学的模型又缺乏一般均衡理论所能提供的经济动力学机制。于是便引出本文将新经济地理学构架引入一般均衡理论的经济动力学的模型构建思路。
第二章,模型的构建及其分析系统的实现。对于本文三国经济增长模拟模型的具体构建,参考了新经济地理学(NEG)的构架,在Pfluger(2004)及Yamamoto(2008)的研究基础上,将两国扩展为三国,引入汇率与关税,同时为了表征新地缘政治经济框架下的三种类型国家,又将制造业的生产函数扩展成三要素CES形式。进一步,本文又将NEG框架与一般均衡理论相结合,通过政府的引入,从而实现对经济危机的动力学模型构建。在模型构建的基础上,采用C#与Matlab联合编程对经济危机的模拟进行系统实现。对于模型的最优化算法核心部分,采用Matlab编写,并通过C#实现调用接口进行运算。进而,运用模拟系统进行了相关的经济危机模拟。
第三章,汇率变动对各国经济影响的情景模拟。模拟发现,无论是金融业国,制造业国,还是资源业国,只要有这个国家本身参与的贬值情景,其经济增长与就业状况就会有所改善；没有这个国家参与的贬值情景,其经济增长与就业状况则会出现不同程度的降低。制造业国的汇率变化更容易发挥影响力,资源业国则更容易受到汇率变化的影响,金融业国则没什么影响力也不大容易受到别国汇率变化的影响。另外,汇率调整是一把双刃剑,任何贬值可以带来就业与产出的增加,却会降低本国居民的人均消费量；升值会带来就业与产出的降低,却会提高本国居民的人均消费水平。
第四章,关税变化对各国的经济影响。结果发现,对任意国家增收关税,并不能带来本国经济或就业情况的改善,反而会导致被增收国经济与就业状况的恶化。任何国家都有进行报复性关税的意愿,因为这样会减少因被对方增收关税所带来的经济损害。另外,在关税的地缘政治经济博弈中,金融业国拥有绝对的话语权,只有制造业国与资源业国的联合应对才能对其构成影响；制造业国无法与金融业国抗衡,但其对资源业国又有着绝对的话语权；资源业国在关税博弈中处于完全的劣势,但其可以通过与他国的联合应对,以谋求自身的经济利益。
第五章,经济危机情景模拟。结果显示,随着金融业国信贷的不断透支,最终会引爆金融业国消费能力大幅下滑,带来全球经济危机。汇率与关税上的政治博弈并不能从根本上改善经济,要提高居民消费能力,扩大需求,才是走出危机的核心动力。另外,资源的约束对经济增长有着制约作用,加大资源约束力度,会延缓各国经济的增长步伐,而制造业国更容易受到影响。同时,随着资源约束的加大,制造业国受金融业国带来的经济危机影响的风险也越大。而对资源价格的干预,降低金融业国与制造业国获得资源的价格水平,会在资源约束的基础上进一步延缓各国经济的发展,并加大各国就业、产出及消费变化的波动性,加速经济危机的到来。
特别值得一提的是,针对欧美强迫人民币升值的问题,本文就制造业国被迫提高汇率的情景进行了模拟。制造业国货币升值会带来制造业国就业的下降,但实际上,由于汇率的双刃剑的作用,在危机爆发后,制造业国实施汇率升值所带来的就业损失小于平时升值带来的就业损失,而所能带来的居民消费增加却高于平时。另外,加大政府公共产品的供给,并通过补贴等转移支付手段提高居民消费能力,将有助于降低汇率升值带来的风险。因此,制造业国借危机后的汇率升值,提高本国居民消费水平,同时又通过国内相关政策调整来消除汇率升值带来的就业率损失,这不失为一种选择。
With the integration of global economy, the economic link among countries becomes more and more inseparable as well as the interaction, both of which contribute to the spread of financial crisis. The American financial crisis begins at 2008 shakes the whole world. Obviously, financial crisis assaults countries in various degrees which in turn affect the world's political and economic patterns.
In order to be ready for challenges from Geopolinomic, we have to understand the essence of financial crisis and its transmission mechanism, moreover, the grasp of the operation rules of new Geopolinomic is also indispensable. A new Geopolinomical frame is set up by this paper:there are three region types, namely financial centralized region, resources centralized region and manufacturing centralized region, shortly financial countries, resources countries and manufacturing countries. This paper simulates the occurrence of financial crisis and learns about its transmission mechanism by the construction of corresponding model system. Besides, tariff and exchange rate—important game tool when talking about Geopolinomic--are also considered. This paper is a useful reference for China to enact its strategy in facing up to financial crisis and take the initiative in the new Geopolinomical games.This paper is divided into 6 sections.
The first part is introduction. This paper started at evolution of Geopolinomic, analyzed the correlation of financial crisis and Geopolinomic, strengthened the importance of the new frame and discussed how the two important tools—tariff and exchange rate—contribute to Geopolinomic games. Reviewing of literatures referred to tariff, exchange rate and economic growth, one country study cannot clarify the mechanism of tariff and exchange rate under complex global economic links and provide an overview of international Geopolinomic. Besides, the tariff custom union under game theory lacks in economic dynamics. A new model is in urgent need. The new economics geography comes up with a frame for multi-region modeling while it lacks in economics dynamics which can be supplemented by General Equilibrium Theory. These are the reasons why this paper brings in economics dynamics model based on the General Equilibrium Theory.
The second paragraph specified the construction of modeling and its analysis system. The three-country economics growth modeling in this paper is following NEG as well as extending two countries to three countries based on the study of Pfluger(2004) and Yamamoto(2008) and bringing in tariff and exchange rate. In order to present the three-type-country frame, the manufacturing functions were expanded to a three elements CES production functions. Moving forward, this paper combined NEG with General Equilibrium Theory and added government function to make up dynamics modeling in financial crisis. Based on the model, a computer system is constructed using C# and Matlab. As for the kernel, this paper used Matlab platform; to the interface, C# is used. After all, this paper simulated financial crisis successfully.
The third part simulates the fluctuation of exchange rate's influence on countries. As long as we concern, the employment rate will increase when a country takes part in devaluation no matter what type it belongs to. On the other side, the participation of other countries weakens the former's employment increment while the ones failing participation see the growth in employment whose result is influenced by the amount of participation countries. Besides, the financial centralized countries observe a relatively less impact of devaluation on their employment rate; the manufacturing centralized countries would be heavily affected by the devaluation while resource centralized countries are much sensitive to it register as the vibrant in employment rate. Another point is that financial centralized countries have least influence on other countries considering the change of rate; as to manufacturing centralized countries which has a mid-level force in the reaction of other countries to its mutative rate experience a greatest impact on employment rate; after all resource centralized countries influenced other countries most on their response to employment rate. To put it frankly, given employment rate, manufacturing centralized countries play a most important role while resource centralized countries are easily disturbed by others, besides, we do not see much can the financial centralized countries do. In addition, regulation of exchange rate has two sides:devaluation brings in increase of employment and output while decreasing annual consumption domestic; rise in value causes decrease in employment and output while increasing consumption.
In the fourth section, this paper dealt with the impact on Economics of different countries caused by tariff. The result was no improvements observed by increasing others ' tariff while worsen others' employment situation. Every country prefers retaliatory tariff for its probability of lessening the financial harm caused by others. Increasing tariff unilaterally could initiate chain reaction of retaliatory tariff which results from diffuse of trade protectionism. Besides, in tariff games, financial centralized countries represent strong voice and only the cooperation of manufacturing centralized countries and resource centralized countries can make sense; manufacturing centralized countries cannot counterbalance financial centralized countries while they have advantages than resource centralized countries; resource centralized countries are the disadvantaged group only relying on the collaboration of others can them hold on economy interests.
Last but not the least, this paper simulated a financial crisis. With the continuing overdraw of financial credit in financial centralized countries, their consuming capacity slide downward to a large extent and financial crisis occurs. Political games on exchange rate and tariff cannot better economics and improve citizens'consuming capacity by the root. The core power of eliminating crisis is to expand demand and strengthen consuming capacity domestic. Besides, resources influence economic growth. The heavier the restrictions are, the slower of countries' economic growth is, especially the manufacturing ones. At the meantime, the risks forcing on manufacturing countries by financial countries become bigger with the severe restriction of resources. On the other hand, the interfere of resources prices, which means the decrease of manufacturing countries'and financial countries' imported resources' price level, would further retard all countries economic development and fluctuate their employment, output and consume level which result in a faster approach of financial crisis.
Be worth mentioning, as for the compel to appreciation of RMB exchange rate around Occident, this paper using manufacturing centralized countries'constrained increase of exchange rate scenario to simulate a crisis. Due to the exchange rate influence, manufacturing countries' decrease in employment is less than that caused by rise in value when financial crisis happens while has the opposite impact on annual consumption. In a word, the increase in its exchange rate would ameliorate economy situation in financial centralized countries and resource centralized countries with the harm forced down manufacturing centralized countries. Faced up to it, the manufacturing centralized countries'governments should enlarge their supply of public product and improve citizens'consuming capacity by transfer payment such as allowance to let the damage down.
引文
1“301条款”有狭义和广义之分。狭义的301条款只是美国1974年修订《贸易法》制定的第301条。具体内容是一种非贸易壁垒性报复措施或者说是一种威胁措施。当别国有“不公正”或“不公平”的贸易做法时,美国贸易代表可以决定实施撤回贸易减让或优惠条件等制裁措施,迫使该国改变其“不公正“或“不公平“的做法。参见毛锦梅.战后美日贸易摩擦研究[D].苏州大学.2009.5：35.
21985年9月22日,美国、日本、西德、英国和法国的财政部长和中央银行行长在纽约广场饭店举行会议,达成一揽子协议,包括抑制通货膨胀、扩大内需、减少贸易干预,联合干预外汇市场,稳步有序地推动美元对日元贬值。参见桥本寿郎.日本经济论.复旦大学日本研究中心译,上海财经大学出版.1997：230
1 Pfluger(2004)提出了这种半对数的居民偏好形式,其模型中考虑了农业和制造业两个部门。在此,本文将其扩充为农业,制造业和服务业三部门,并认为服务业与制造业类似,不是基本消费,且存在效用递减。
1我们认为制造业技术水平的提高可以改善农业的劳动生产水平,然而对于它们两者之间的具体函数关系认识并不明确。这里的农业生产函数的设定,只是一种不影响模型核心问题的简化处理。下文服务业生产函数的设定,也遇到类似的问题,我们也做了相应的简化处理。
2具体推导过程参见附录B
1金融业国、制造业国及资源业国三国在金融发展水平上存在巨大差异。金融业国凭借其高度发达的金融市场及强大的金融实力,可以发挥巨大的信用创造能力,增强国内的投资能力；而制造业国及资源业国则缺乏信用创造能力,其储蓄转化为投资的能力也较弱。为此,我们引入信贷资本,用以简单的表达三个国家这种融资能力的差距。若kCredit,i>0,表明该国金融市场发达,kCredit,i<0则表示该国金融市场落后,储蓄投资转化率较低。
1滕丽,王铮(2010)在其构建的自然资源两区域溢出模型中对ψ的取值,进行了探索。发现ψ越大,即资本对资源再生影响强度的系数越大,则资源随资本增加而减少的趋势越严重；而且这种再生能力的作用是非线性的,ψ越大其下降的速度越快。并指出资源再生能力越弱,资源输出区域也容易在区域贸易中受到损害。
1由于各国资本使用量都是以本币表示,为了增强可比性,各国的资本都以世界货币的形式对资源的产生影响。同样,下面关于技术水平的讨论,也采用相同的处理方法。
22.3.5小节,沿用了基础模型中2.2.2小节企业部分的生产过程,为了保持模型扩展部分的完整性,按照扩展模型的要求进行了重新书写。
1若三个国家同时贬值10%,则三国间的汇率相对值不发生变化,故贬值只有6种情景；而升值即是与贬值相反的情景模拟,故不作长篇累牍。
1为方便起见,将其作为“表4.2中的情景1”简称,下同。
1 Aghion P, Bacchetta P, Ranciere R et al. Exchange rate volatility and productivity growth:The role of financial development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics,2009,56(4):494-513.
2 Arrow KJ. Social Choice and Individual Values[M]:Wiley&Sons,1951.
3 Arrow KJ, Debreu G. Existence of Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy[J]. Econometrica, 1954(22):265-290.
4 Azis IJ. Stimulation Economy-Wide Models to Capture the Transition From Financial Crisis to Social Crisis[J]. The Annals of Regional Science,2000(34:):251-278.
5 Baldwin RE. Agglomeration and Endogenous Capital[J]. European Economic Review,1999(43):253-280.
6 Baldwin RE, Martin P, Ottaviano GIP. Global Income Divergence, Trade and Industrialization:The Geography of Growth Take-offs[J]. Journal of Economic Growth,2001(6):5-37.
7 Baldwin RE, Forslid R, Martin P et al. Economic Geography and Public Policy [M]:Princeton University Press,2003.
8 Barro RJ, Sala-i-Martin X. Economic growth[M]:McGraw-Hill,1995.
9 Berglas I. The Case for Unilateral Tariff Redutions:Foreign Tariffs Rediscovered[J]. American Eeonomic Review,1983,73(11):1141 - 1145.
10 Bleaney M, Greenaway D. The impact of terms of trade and real exchange rate volatility on investment and growth in sub-Saharan Africa[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2001,65(2):491-500.
11 Branson W, Love J. United States Manufacturing and the Real Exchange Rate[A]. In:Misalignment of Exchange Rates:Effects on Trade and Industry[C]. Edited by Marston R. Chicago, Illinois:University of Chicago Press,1988.
12 Brestschger L. Growth theory and sustainable development[M]. UK:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited Glensanda House,1999.
13 Burgess S, Knetter M. An International Comparison of Employment Adjustment to Exchange Rate Fluctuations[J]. Review of International Economics,1998(6):151-163
14 Cohen SB. Global Geopolitical Change in the Post-Cold War Era[J]. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,1991,81(4):551-580.
15 Cooper, C.A., Massell, B.F. Towards a General Theory of Customs Union in Developing Countries[J]. Journal of Politieal Economy,1965,23(4):73-85.
16 De Grauwe P, Schnabl G. Exchange rate stability, inflation, and growth in (South) Eastern and Central Europe[J]. Review of Development Economics,2008,12(3):530-549.
17 Demko GJ, Wood WB. Reordering the World:Geopolitical Perspectives on the Twenty-First Century[M]: Westview Press,1994.
18 Edwards S. Real Exchange Rates, Devaluation, and Adjustment Exchange Rate Policy in Developing Countries[M]. Cambridge, Massachusetts:The MIT Press,1989.
19 Eric Wb, Alan WL. Deepening of Regional Integration and Mutilateral trade Agreements[J]. Journal of International Economics,2001(53):335-361.
20 Fisher TCG, Waschik RG. Union Bargaining Power, Relative Wages, and Efficiency in Canada[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics,2000,33(3):742-765.
21 Forslid R. Agglomeration with Human and Physical Capital:an Analytically Solvable Case [Z]. CEPR Discussion Paper No12102,1999.
22 Forslid R, Ottaviano GIP. An Analytically Solvable Core-Periphery Model[J]. Journal of Economic Geography,2003(3):229-401.
23 Fujita M, Krugman P, Venables AJ. The Spatial Economy:Cities, Regions, and International Trade[M]. Cambridge, Massachusetts:MIT Press,2001.
24 Fujita M, Thisse J-F. Economics of Agglomeration:Cities, Industrial Location, and Regional Growth[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2002.
25 Fung L. Large real exchange rate movements, firm dynamics, and productivity growth[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics-Revue Canadienne D Economique,2008,41(2):391-424.
26 Galindo A, Izquierdo A, Montero JM. Real Exchange Rates, Dollarization and Industrial Employment in Latin America[J]. Emerging Markets Review,2007,8(4):284-298.
27 Gottinger HW. Monitoring pollution accidents[J]. EurJ Oper Res,1998,104(1):18-30.
28 Gourinchas P-O. Exchange Rates and Jobs:What Do We Learn from Job Flows?[A]. In:NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1998[C]. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press,1998:153-207.
29 Hanson K, Robinson S., Schluter G. Sectoral Effects of a World Oil Price Shock:Economy-Wide Linkages to the Agricultural Sector[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,1993,18(1):96-116.
30 Harberger AC. The Incidence of Corporate Income Tax[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1994(70):215-240.
31 Hatemi-J A, Irandoust M. The Response of Industry Employment to Exchange Rate Shocks:Evidence from Panel Cointegration[J]. Applied Economics,2006,38(4):415-421.
32 Johansen. A Multi-Sectoral Study of Economic Growth[M]. Amsterdam:North-Holland Press,1960.
33 Johdo W, Hashimoto K-i. International Relocation, the Real Exchange Rate and Effective Demand[J]. Japan and the World Economy,2009,21(1):39-54.
34 Kehoe TJ, Polo C, Sancho F. An Evaluation of the Performance of an Applied General Equilibrium Model of the Spanish Economy[J]. Economic Theory,1995,6(1):115-141.
35 Kim E, Kim K. Impacts of Regional Development Strategies on Growth and Equity of Korea:A Multiregional Cge Model[J]. The Annals of Regional Science,2002(36):165-180.
36 Klein MW, Schuh S, Triest R. Job Creation, Job Destruction, and the Real Exchange Rate[J]. Journal of International Economics,2003,59:239-265.
37 Krishna P, Bhagwati J. Necessarily welfare-enhancing customs union with industrialization constrains[J]. Japan and the World Economy,2002(9):441-446.
38 Krugman P. Increasing Return and Economic Geography[J]. The Journal of Political Economy,1991, 99:483-499.
39 Krugman P, Venables AJ. Globalization and the Inequality of Nations[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1995(60):857-880.
40 LaRochelle-Cote S. Tariff reduction and employment in Canadian manufacturing[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics-Revue Canadienne D Economique,2007,40(3):843-860.
41 Marquez G, Pages C. Trade and Employment:Evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean[Z]. In: RES Working Papers. Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department,1997.
42 Mai C-C, Peng S-K, Tabuchi T. Economic geography with tariff competition[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,2008,38(5):478-486.
43 Martin P, Rogers CA. Industrial Location and Public Infrastructure[J]. Journal of International Economics, 1995(39):335-351.
44 Martin P, Ottaviano GIP. Growing Locations:Industry in a Model of Endogenous Growth [J]. European Economic Review,1999(43):281-302.
45 Mckenzie LW. On Equilibrium in Graham'S Model of World Trade and Other Competitive Systems[J]. Econometrica,1954(22):147-161.
46 Oskooee M-B, Mirzaie IA, Miteza. I. Sectoral Employment, Wages and the Exchange Rate:Evidence from the U. S[J]. Eastern Economic Journal,2007,33:125-135.
47 Ottaviano GIP. Monopolistic Competition, Trade, and Endogenous Spatial Fluctuations[Z].CEPR Discussion Paper.No11327.1996.
48 Ottaviano GIP, Puga D. Agglomeration in the Global Economy:A Survey of the'New Economic Geography'[J]. The World Economy,1998,21(6):707-731.
49 Ottaviano GIP. Models of "New Economic Geography":Factor Mobility vs Vertical Linkages [Z] Mimeo, Graduate Institute of International Studies,2002.
50 Pfluger M. A Simple, Analytically Solvable, Chamberlinian Agglomeration Model[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,2004,34(5):565-573.
51 Revenga A. Exporting Jobs? The Impact of Import Competition on Employment and Wages in US Manufacturing[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992,107(1):255-284.
52 Ribeiro EP, Corseuil C, Santos D et al. Trade Liberalization, the Exchange Rate and Job Flows in Brazil[J]. Journal of Economic Policy Reform,2004,7(4):209-223.
53 Robert-Nicoud F. A Simple Geography Model with Vertical Linkages and Capital Mobility [Z]. Mimeo,London School of Economics,2002.
54 Rodrik D. The Real Exchange Rate and Economic Growth[J]. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2008(2)365-439.
55 Ruocco A. Savings and Investment Fiscal Policies:A Quantitative Analysis for the Italian Economy in Economic Modeling Under the Applied General Equilibrium Approach[M], A. Fossati, Avebury edn: Ashgate Publishing Limited,1996.
56 Scarf H. The Approximation of Fixed Points of Continuous Mapping[J]. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 1967,15(5):328-343.
57 Scarf H. On the Computation of Equilibrium Price[M], Fellner, W. edn:Ten Essays in Honor Irving Fisher, 1967.
58 Scarf H. The Computation of Economic Equilibrium[M]. New Haven:The Yale University Press,1973.
59 Schmidt A, Arancibia P, Kahlon R et al. Geopolitics, Global Governance and Crisis Narratives[J]. IDS Bulletin,2009,40(5):89-100.
60 Schnabl G. Exchange Rate Volatility and Growth in Emerging Europe and East Asia[J]. Open Economies Review,2009,20(4):565-587.
61 Shoven JB, Whalley J. A General Equilibrium Calculation of the Effects of Differential Taxation of Income From Capital in the U.S.[J]. Journal of Public Economics,1972(1):281-321.
62 Shoven JB, Whalley J. General Equilibrium with Taxes:A Computational Procedure and an Existence Proof [J]. The Review of Economic Studies,1973(4):475-489.
63 Shoven JB, Whalley J. On the Computation of Competitive Equilibrium On International Markets with Tariffs[J]. Journal of International Economics,1974(4):341-354.
64 Siriwardana M. Can Policy-Makers Learn From History? A General Equilibrium Analysis of the Recovery Policies of the 1930S Great Depression in Australia[J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,1998,20(3):361-392.
65 Tharakan J. Economic growth and exchange rate uncertainty[J]. Applied Economics,1999, 31(3):347-358.
66 Tyler GJ. Export Demand and Botswana'S Beef Industry:A Computable General Equilibrium Approach[J]. African Development Review,1996,8(2):59-67.
67 Victor B-T. The Central American Common Market:From Closed to Open Regionalism[J]. World Development,2003,26(2):313-322.
68 Viner J. The Customs Union Issue[J]. Carnegie Endomwent for International Peace,1950,31(5):91 -123.
69 Wald A. On Some Systems of Equations of Mathematical Economics[J]. Zeitschrift fur Nationalokonomie, 1936(7):637-670.
70 Walras L. Elements D' Economie Politique Pure[M]:Lausanne:L.Corbaz. Transl. By William Jaffe as Elements of Pure Economics. Homewood, III:Richard D.Irwin (1954),1874.
71 Wendner R. An Applied Dynamic General Equilibrium Model of Environmental Tax Reforms and Pension Policy[J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,2001(23):25-50.
72 Wonnacott P, Wonnacott R. Is Unilateral Tariff Reduetion Preferbale to a Customs Union?[J]. American Eeonomic Review,1981,71(6):704-714.
73 Yamamoto K. Location of Industry, Market Size, and Imperfect International Capital Mobility[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,2008,38(5):518-532.
74 Yi S-S. Stable Coalition Structures with Externalities[J]. Games and Economic Behavior, 2004(20):201-237.
75 Zhang ZX. Macroeconomic Effects of:A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis for China[J]. Policy Modeling,1998,20(2):213-250.
76保罗·克拉瓦尔[法].地理学思想史[M].郑胜华,等译.北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
77保罗·佩迪什[法].古希腊人的地理学——古希腊地理学史[M].蔡宗夏,译.：北京：商务印书馆,1983.
78曾路.广东区位的地缘政治与地缘经济分析[D].暨南大学,2005.
79曾莹.汇率冲击和行业就业调整[J].南开经济研究,2006(5)：46-55.
80陈锴.中国-东盟地缘经济关系研究[D].上海社会科学院,2009.
81陈良文,杨开忠.我国区域经济差异变动的原因：一个要素流动和集聚经济的视角[J].当地经济科学,2007,29(3)：35-42.
82程永林.中国古代地缘战略思想：历史嬗变与现实借鉴[J].兰州学刊,2005(147)：39-41.
83崔军.东北亚地缘经济合作研究[D].吉林大学,2004.
84丁剑平,鄂永健.实际汇率、工资和就业——对中国贸易部门和非贸易部门的实证研究[J].财经研究,2005(11)：1-8.
85鄂永健,丁剑平.实际汇率与就业——基于内生劳动力供给的跨期均衡分析[J].财经研究,2006,32(4)：13-48.
86高鸿业.西方经济学(第二版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001.
87葛昭攀,吴兵.基于MATLAB进行混合编程的接口技术实现[J].小型微型计算机系统,2003, 24(12)：2219-2223.
88鬼谷子[先秦].纵横经[M].北京：中国华侨出版社,2001.
89郭渊.南海地缘政治研究[D].厦门大学,2006.
90哈尔福德·麦金德[英].民主的理想与现实[M].武原,译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.
91哈尔福德·麦金德[英].历史的地理枢纽[M].林尔蔚,陈江,等译.北京：商务印书馆,1985.
92汉斯·摩根索[美].国家间政治[M].徐听等,译.北京：中国人民公安出版社,1990.
93胡宗义,蔡文彬.能源税征收对能源强度影响的CGE研究[J].湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2007,21(5)：57-61.
94胡宗义,刘亦文.人民币激进升值对中国经济冲击的动态CGE分析[J].湖南师范大学社会科学学报,2010(4)：91-94.
95杰弗里·帕克[英].二十世纪的西方地理政治思想.李亦鸣,译.北京：解放军出版社,1992.
96.肯尼斯·W.汤普森[美].国际思想大师[M].耿协峰,译.北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
97肯尼斯·沃尔兹[美].国际政治理论[M].胡少华,王红缨,译.北京：中国人民公安大学出版社,1992.
98李娜,石敏俊,王飞.区域差异和区域联系对中国区域政策效果的作用：基于中国八区域CGE模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2009,29(10)：35-44.
99李晓峰,钱利珍,人民币实际有效汇率变动对就业影响的传导渠道分析[J].上海金融,2010(4)：71-77.
100李义虎.地缘政治学：二分论及其超越[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
101李玉成,杨开忠.新经济地理学预期问题的回顾与展望[J].广西社会科学,2008(6)：8-91.
102利果.基于CGE的上海市宏观经济政策模拟系统开发及其应用[D].华东师范大学,2008.
103刘从德.地缘政治学：历史、方法与世界格局[M].武汉：华中师范大学出版社,1998.
104刘清春,王铮.中国区域经济差异形成的三次地理要素[J].地理研究,2009(2)：430-440.
105刘雪莲.地缘政治学[M].长春：吉林大学出版社,2002.
106罗杰·阿尔特曼[美].衰退中的全球化——金融危机对地缘政治的进一步影响[J].云南师范大学马克思主义理论研究中心译.国外理论动态.2010.
107吕作奎.基于CGE的中国宏观经济模拟系统开发及其应用[D].华东师范大学,2008.
108马晓哲.中国分省碳排放系统—模型和GIS[D]华东师范大学,2010.
109毛锦梅.战后美日贸易摩擦研究[D].苏州大学,2009.
110尼古拉斯·斯皮克曼[美].和平地理学[M].刘愈之,译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.
111倪世雄.当代西方国际关系理论[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2001.
112普雷斯顿·詹姆斯[美].地理学思想史[M].李旭旦,译.北京：商务印书馆,1982.
113桥本寿郎[日].日本经济论.复旦大学日本研究中心译[M].上海：上海财经大学出版,1997.
114沙文兵.人民币实际有效汇率的水平与波动性对就业的影响——基于东部地区面板数据的实证 分析[J].世界经济研究,2009(4)：20-24.
115司马迁[西汉].史记[M].河南：中州古籍出版社,1996.
116宋岩,侯铁珊.关税同盟的贸易效应和纳什均衡分析[J].国际商务——对外经济贸易大学学报,2005(6)：26-30.
117宋岩.规模经济视角下关税同盟福利效应研究.大连理工大学[D], 2006.
118宋玉华,吴聆.关税升级与垄断竞争产业发展：基于空间经济学的分析[J].世界经济,2006(7)：15-27.
119孙武[春秋].孙子兵法[M].昆明：云南教育出版社,2010.
120孙翊,朱艳鑫,王铮.金融危机下国家大规模投资政策模拟[J].地理研究,2010,29(5)：789-800.
121滕丽.GIS环境下的区域溢出研究[D].华东师范大学,2005.
122滕丽,王铮.区域溢出[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.
123万解秋,徐涛.汇率调整对中国就业的影响——基于理论与经验的研究[J].经济研究,2004(2)：39-46.
124王恩涌.地缘政治学为什么又重新兴起[J].中学地理教学参考,1996(12)：37.
125王胜,邹恒甫.不确定情况下的关税、货币政策[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2004(12)：5-18.
126王铮,刘扬.粮食生产受价格影响的模拟分析[J].经济科学,1999(3)：14-23.
127王铮,张焕波..汇率变动与经济危机：人民币汇率问题分析[J].经济科学,2005(5)：72-79.
128王铮,滕丽,蔡砥.资源约束下两区域的增长[J].自然资源学报,2008(4)：581-588.
129王铮,夏海斌,吴静.普通地理学[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.
130王直,王慧炯,李善同等.中国加入世贸组织对世界劳动密集产品市场与美国农业出口的影响-动态递推可计算一般均衡分析[J].经济研究,1997(4)：54-65.
131翁瑾,杨开忠.旅游系统的空间结构：一个具有不对称特点的垄断竞争的空间模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2007(2)：76-82.
132吴兵.中国经济可计算一般均衡分析决策支持系统的研究与应用[D].华东师范大学,2004.
133吴静,王铮,吴兵.石油价格上涨对中国经济的冲击——可计算一般均衡模型分析[J].中国农业大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2)：69-75.
134习罡华.地缘政治与1947-1974年的克什米尔冲突[D].北京大学,2008.
135谢杰.人民币实际汇率升值对中国经济各产业的影响——基于可计算一般均衡模型(CGE)的分析[J].首都经济贸易大学学报,2010(3)：29-36.
136谢书玲.结合GIS的新经济产业地理计算模型研究及应用[D].华东师范大学,2006.
137新华网.奥巴马提出为中产阶级减税计划[EB/OL]. http://www.china.com.cn/news/txt/2010-09/09/content_20893141.htm,2010-09-09.
138许统生.中国进口关税保护的动态成本估计——基于商品价格关联效应的投入产出分析[J].经 济学动态,2009(8)：28-32.
139亚里士多德[古希腊].政治学[M].吴寿彭,译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.
140叶自成.地缘政治与中国外交[M].北京：北京出版社,1998.
141殷广卫,李佶.空间经济学概念及其前沿-新经济地理学发展脉络综述[J].西南民族大学学报,2010(1)：75-82.
142俞乔.论中国汇率政策与国内经济目标的冲突及协调[J].经济研究,1999(7)：23-32.
143袁宇杰.旅游CGE系统开发及应用[D].华东师范大学,2010.
144翟凡,李善同,王直.关税减让、国内税替代及其收入分配效应[J].经济研究,1996(12)：41-50.
145张海藩.软件工程导论(第四版)[M].北京：清华大学出版社,2003.
146张薇薇.冲突与联合：对主导性的地缘政治观的分析与反思[D].吉林大学,2009.
147章士平.中国海权[M].北京：人民日报出版社,1998.
148赵伟,李芬.异质性劳动力流动与区域收入差距：新经济地理学模型的扩展分析[J].中国人口科学,2007(1)：27-35.
149朱里奥·杜黑[意].制空权[M].曹毅风,华人杰,译.北京：解放军出版社,1986.
21985年9月22日,美国、日本、西德、英国和法国的财政部长和中央银行行长在纽约广场饭店举行会议,达成一揽子协议,包括抑制通货膨胀、扩大内需、减少贸易干预,联合干预外汇市场,稳步有序地推动美元对日元贬值。参见桥本寿郎.日本经济论.复旦大学日本研究中心译,上海财经大学出版.1997：230
1 Pfluger(2004)提出了这种半对数的居民偏好形式,其模型中考虑了农业和制造业两个部门。在此,本文将其扩充为农业,制造业和服务业三部门,并认为服务业与制造业类似,不是基本消费,且存在效用递减。
1我们认为制造业技术水平的提高可以改善农业的劳动生产水平,然而对于它们两者之间的具体函数关系认识并不明确。这里的农业生产函数的设定,只是一种不影响模型核心问题的简化处理。下文服务业生产函数的设定,也遇到类似的问题,我们也做了相应的简化处理。
2具体推导过程参见附录B
1金融业国、制造业国及资源业国三国在金融发展水平上存在巨大差异。金融业国凭借其高度发达的金融市场及强大的金融实力,可以发挥巨大的信用创造能力,增强国内的投资能力；而制造业国及资源业国则缺乏信用创造能力,其储蓄转化为投资的能力也较弱。为此,我们引入信贷资本,用以简单的表达三个国家这种融资能力的差距。若kCredit,i>0,表明该国金融市场发达,kCredit,i<0则表示该国金融市场落后,储蓄投资转化率较低。
1滕丽,王铮(2010)在其构建的自然资源两区域溢出模型中对ψ的取值,进行了探索。发现ψ越大,即资本对资源再生影响强度的系数越大,则资源随资本增加而减少的趋势越严重；而且这种再生能力的作用是非线性的,ψ越大其下降的速度越快。并指出资源再生能力越弱,资源输出区域也容易在区域贸易中受到损害。
1由于各国资本使用量都是以本币表示,为了增强可比性,各国的资本都以世界货币的形式对资源的产生影响。同样,下面关于技术水平的讨论,也采用相同的处理方法。
22.3.5小节,沿用了基础模型中2.2.2小节企业部分的生产过程,为了保持模型扩展部分的完整性,按照扩展模型的要求进行了重新书写。
1若三个国家同时贬值10%,则三国间的汇率相对值不发生变化,故贬值只有6种情景；而升值即是与贬值相反的情景模拟,故不作长篇累牍。
1为方便起见,将其作为“表4.2中的情景1”简称,下同。
1 Aghion P, Bacchetta P, Ranciere R et al. Exchange rate volatility and productivity growth:The role of financial development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics,2009,56(4):494-513.
2 Arrow KJ. Social Choice and Individual Values[M]:Wiley&Sons,1951.
3 Arrow KJ, Debreu G. Existence of Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy[J]. Econometrica, 1954(22):265-290.
4 Azis IJ. Stimulation Economy-Wide Models to Capture the Transition From Financial Crisis to Social Crisis[J]. The Annals of Regional Science,2000(34:):251-278.
5 Baldwin RE. Agglomeration and Endogenous Capital[J]. European Economic Review,1999(43):253-280.
6 Baldwin RE, Martin P, Ottaviano GIP. Global Income Divergence, Trade and Industrialization:The Geography of Growth Take-offs[J]. Journal of Economic Growth,2001(6):5-37.
7 Baldwin RE, Forslid R, Martin P et al. Economic Geography and Public Policy [M]:Princeton University Press,2003.
8 Barro RJ, Sala-i-Martin X. Economic growth[M]:McGraw-Hill,1995.
9 Berglas I. The Case for Unilateral Tariff Redutions:Foreign Tariffs Rediscovered[J]. American Eeonomic Review,1983,73(11):1141 - 1145.
10 Bleaney M, Greenaway D. The impact of terms of trade and real exchange rate volatility on investment and growth in sub-Saharan Africa[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2001,65(2):491-500.
11 Branson W, Love J. United States Manufacturing and the Real Exchange Rate[A]. In:Misalignment of Exchange Rates:Effects on Trade and Industry[C]. Edited by Marston R. Chicago, Illinois:University of Chicago Press,1988.
12 Brestschger L. Growth theory and sustainable development[M]. UK:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited Glensanda House,1999.
13 Burgess S, Knetter M. An International Comparison of Employment Adjustment to Exchange Rate Fluctuations[J]. Review of International Economics,1998(6):151-163
14 Cohen SB. Global Geopolitical Change in the Post-Cold War Era[J]. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,1991,81(4):551-580.
15 Cooper, C.A., Massell, B.F. Towards a General Theory of Customs Union in Developing Countries[J]. Journal of Politieal Economy,1965,23(4):73-85.
16 De Grauwe P, Schnabl G. Exchange rate stability, inflation, and growth in (South) Eastern and Central Europe[J]. Review of Development Economics,2008,12(3):530-549.
17 Demko GJ, Wood WB. Reordering the World:Geopolitical Perspectives on the Twenty-First Century[M]: Westview Press,1994.
18 Edwards S. Real Exchange Rates, Devaluation, and Adjustment Exchange Rate Policy in Developing Countries[M]. Cambridge, Massachusetts:The MIT Press,1989.
19 Eric Wb, Alan WL. Deepening of Regional Integration and Mutilateral trade Agreements[J]. Journal of International Economics,2001(53):335-361.
20 Fisher TCG, Waschik RG. Union Bargaining Power, Relative Wages, and Efficiency in Canada[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics,2000,33(3):742-765.
21 Forslid R. Agglomeration with Human and Physical Capital:an Analytically Solvable Case [Z]. CEPR Discussion Paper No12102,1999.
22 Forslid R, Ottaviano GIP. An Analytically Solvable Core-Periphery Model[J]. Journal of Economic Geography,2003(3):229-401.
23 Fujita M, Krugman P, Venables AJ. The Spatial Economy:Cities, Regions, and International Trade[M]. Cambridge, Massachusetts:MIT Press,2001.
24 Fujita M, Thisse J-F. Economics of Agglomeration:Cities, Industrial Location, and Regional Growth[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2002.
25 Fung L. Large real exchange rate movements, firm dynamics, and productivity growth[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics-Revue Canadienne D Economique,2008,41(2):391-424.
26 Galindo A, Izquierdo A, Montero JM. Real Exchange Rates, Dollarization and Industrial Employment in Latin America[J]. Emerging Markets Review,2007,8(4):284-298.
27 Gottinger HW. Monitoring pollution accidents[J]. EurJ Oper Res,1998,104(1):18-30.
28 Gourinchas P-O. Exchange Rates and Jobs:What Do We Learn from Job Flows?[A]. In:NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1998[C]. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press,1998:153-207.
29 Hanson K, Robinson S., Schluter G. Sectoral Effects of a World Oil Price Shock:Economy-Wide Linkages to the Agricultural Sector[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,1993,18(1):96-116.
30 Harberger AC. The Incidence of Corporate Income Tax[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1994(70):215-240.
31 Hatemi-J A, Irandoust M. The Response of Industry Employment to Exchange Rate Shocks:Evidence from Panel Cointegration[J]. Applied Economics,2006,38(4):415-421.
32 Johansen. A Multi-Sectoral Study of Economic Growth[M]. Amsterdam:North-Holland Press,1960.
33 Johdo W, Hashimoto K-i. International Relocation, the Real Exchange Rate and Effective Demand[J]. Japan and the World Economy,2009,21(1):39-54.
34 Kehoe TJ, Polo C, Sancho F. An Evaluation of the Performance of an Applied General Equilibrium Model of the Spanish Economy[J]. Economic Theory,1995,6(1):115-141.
35 Kim E, Kim K. Impacts of Regional Development Strategies on Growth and Equity of Korea:A Multiregional Cge Model[J]. The Annals of Regional Science,2002(36):165-180.
36 Klein MW, Schuh S, Triest R. Job Creation, Job Destruction, and the Real Exchange Rate[J]. Journal of International Economics,2003,59:239-265.
37 Krishna P, Bhagwati J. Necessarily welfare-enhancing customs union with industrialization constrains[J]. Japan and the World Economy,2002(9):441-446.
38 Krugman P. Increasing Return and Economic Geography[J]. The Journal of Political Economy,1991, 99:483-499.
39 Krugman P, Venables AJ. Globalization and the Inequality of Nations[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1995(60):857-880.
40 LaRochelle-Cote S. Tariff reduction and employment in Canadian manufacturing[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics-Revue Canadienne D Economique,2007,40(3):843-860.
41 Marquez G, Pages C. Trade and Employment:Evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean[Z]. In: RES Working Papers. Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department,1997.
42 Mai C-C, Peng S-K, Tabuchi T. Economic geography with tariff competition[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,2008,38(5):478-486.
43 Martin P, Rogers CA. Industrial Location and Public Infrastructure[J]. Journal of International Economics, 1995(39):335-351.
44 Martin P, Ottaviano GIP. Growing Locations:Industry in a Model of Endogenous Growth [J]. European Economic Review,1999(43):281-302.
45 Mckenzie LW. On Equilibrium in Graham'S Model of World Trade and Other Competitive Systems[J]. Econometrica,1954(22):147-161.
46 Oskooee M-B, Mirzaie IA, Miteza. I. Sectoral Employment, Wages and the Exchange Rate:Evidence from the U. S[J]. Eastern Economic Journal,2007,33:125-135.
47 Ottaviano GIP. Monopolistic Competition, Trade, and Endogenous Spatial Fluctuations[Z].CEPR Discussion Paper.No11327.1996.
48 Ottaviano GIP, Puga D. Agglomeration in the Global Economy:A Survey of the'New Economic Geography'[J]. The World Economy,1998,21(6):707-731.
49 Ottaviano GIP. Models of "New Economic Geography":Factor Mobility vs Vertical Linkages [Z] Mimeo, Graduate Institute of International Studies,2002.
50 Pfluger M. A Simple, Analytically Solvable, Chamberlinian Agglomeration Model[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,2004,34(5):565-573.
51 Revenga A. Exporting Jobs? The Impact of Import Competition on Employment and Wages in US Manufacturing[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992,107(1):255-284.
52 Ribeiro EP, Corseuil C, Santos D et al. Trade Liberalization, the Exchange Rate and Job Flows in Brazil[J]. Journal of Economic Policy Reform,2004,7(4):209-223.
53 Robert-Nicoud F. A Simple Geography Model with Vertical Linkages and Capital Mobility [Z]. Mimeo,London School of Economics,2002.
54 Rodrik D. The Real Exchange Rate and Economic Growth[J]. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2008(2)365-439.
55 Ruocco A. Savings and Investment Fiscal Policies:A Quantitative Analysis for the Italian Economy in Economic Modeling Under the Applied General Equilibrium Approach[M], A. Fossati, Avebury edn: Ashgate Publishing Limited,1996.
56 Scarf H. The Approximation of Fixed Points of Continuous Mapping[J]. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 1967,15(5):328-343.
57 Scarf H. On the Computation of Equilibrium Price[M], Fellner, W. edn:Ten Essays in Honor Irving Fisher, 1967.
58 Scarf H. The Computation of Economic Equilibrium[M]. New Haven:The Yale University Press,1973.
59 Schmidt A, Arancibia P, Kahlon R et al. Geopolitics, Global Governance and Crisis Narratives[J]. IDS Bulletin,2009,40(5):89-100.
60 Schnabl G. Exchange Rate Volatility and Growth in Emerging Europe and East Asia[J]. Open Economies Review,2009,20(4):565-587.
61 Shoven JB, Whalley J. A General Equilibrium Calculation of the Effects of Differential Taxation of Income From Capital in the U.S.[J]. Journal of Public Economics,1972(1):281-321.
62 Shoven JB, Whalley J. General Equilibrium with Taxes:A Computational Procedure and an Existence Proof [J]. The Review of Economic Studies,1973(4):475-489.
63 Shoven JB, Whalley J. On the Computation of Competitive Equilibrium On International Markets with Tariffs[J]. Journal of International Economics,1974(4):341-354.
64 Siriwardana M. Can Policy-Makers Learn From History? A General Equilibrium Analysis of the Recovery Policies of the 1930S Great Depression in Australia[J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,1998,20(3):361-392.
65 Tharakan J. Economic growth and exchange rate uncertainty[J]. Applied Economics,1999, 31(3):347-358.
66 Tyler GJ. Export Demand and Botswana'S Beef Industry:A Computable General Equilibrium Approach[J]. African Development Review,1996,8(2):59-67.
67 Victor B-T. The Central American Common Market:From Closed to Open Regionalism[J]. World Development,2003,26(2):313-322.
68 Viner J. The Customs Union Issue[J]. Carnegie Endomwent for International Peace,1950,31(5):91 -123.
69 Wald A. On Some Systems of Equations of Mathematical Economics[J]. Zeitschrift fur Nationalokonomie, 1936(7):637-670.
70 Walras L. Elements D' Economie Politique Pure[M]:Lausanne:L.Corbaz. Transl. By William Jaffe as Elements of Pure Economics. Homewood, III:Richard D.Irwin (1954),1874.
71 Wendner R. An Applied Dynamic General Equilibrium Model of Environmental Tax Reforms and Pension Policy[J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,2001(23):25-50.
72 Wonnacott P, Wonnacott R. Is Unilateral Tariff Reduetion Preferbale to a Customs Union?[J]. American Eeonomic Review,1981,71(6):704-714.
73 Yamamoto K. Location of Industry, Market Size, and Imperfect International Capital Mobility[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,2008,38(5):518-532.
74 Yi S-S. Stable Coalition Structures with Externalities[J]. Games and Economic Behavior, 2004(20):201-237.
75 Zhang ZX. Macroeconomic Effects of:A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis for China[J]. Policy Modeling,1998,20(2):213-250.
76保罗·克拉瓦尔[法].地理学思想史[M].郑胜华,等译.北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
77保罗·佩迪什[法].古希腊人的地理学——古希腊地理学史[M].蔡宗夏,译.：北京：商务印书馆,1983.
78曾路.广东区位的地缘政治与地缘经济分析[D].暨南大学,2005.
79曾莹.汇率冲击和行业就业调整[J].南开经济研究,2006(5)：46-55.
80陈锴.中国-东盟地缘经济关系研究[D].上海社会科学院,2009.
81陈良文,杨开忠.我国区域经济差异变动的原因：一个要素流动和集聚经济的视角[J].当地经济科学,2007,29(3)：35-42.
82程永林.中国古代地缘战略思想：历史嬗变与现实借鉴[J].兰州学刊,2005(147)：39-41.
83崔军.东北亚地缘经济合作研究[D].吉林大学,2004.
84丁剑平,鄂永健.实际汇率、工资和就业——对中国贸易部门和非贸易部门的实证研究[J].财经研究,2005(11)：1-8.
85鄂永健,丁剑平.实际汇率与就业——基于内生劳动力供给的跨期均衡分析[J].财经研究,2006,32(4)：13-48.
86高鸿业.西方经济学(第二版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001.
87葛昭攀,吴兵.基于MATLAB进行混合编程的接口技术实现[J].小型微型计算机系统,2003, 24(12)：2219-2223.
88鬼谷子[先秦].纵横经[M].北京：中国华侨出版社,2001.
89郭渊.南海地缘政治研究[D].厦门大学,2006.
90哈尔福德·麦金德[英].民主的理想与现实[M].武原,译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.
91哈尔福德·麦金德[英].历史的地理枢纽[M].林尔蔚,陈江,等译.北京：商务印书馆,1985.
92汉斯·摩根索[美].国家间政治[M].徐听等,译.北京：中国人民公安出版社,1990.
93胡宗义,蔡文彬.能源税征收对能源强度影响的CGE研究[J].湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2007,21(5)：57-61.
94胡宗义,刘亦文.人民币激进升值对中国经济冲击的动态CGE分析[J].湖南师范大学社会科学学报,2010(4)：91-94.
95杰弗里·帕克[英].二十世纪的西方地理政治思想.李亦鸣,译.北京：解放军出版社,1992.
96.肯尼斯·W.汤普森[美].国际思想大师[M].耿协峰,译.北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
97肯尼斯·沃尔兹[美].国际政治理论[M].胡少华,王红缨,译.北京：中国人民公安大学出版社,1992.
98李娜,石敏俊,王飞.区域差异和区域联系对中国区域政策效果的作用：基于中国八区域CGE模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2009,29(10)：35-44.
99李晓峰,钱利珍,人民币实际有效汇率变动对就业影响的传导渠道分析[J].上海金融,2010(4)：71-77.
100李义虎.地缘政治学：二分论及其超越[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2007.
101李玉成,杨开忠.新经济地理学预期问题的回顾与展望[J].广西社会科学,2008(6)：8-91.
102利果.基于CGE的上海市宏观经济政策模拟系统开发及其应用[D].华东师范大学,2008.
103刘从德.地缘政治学：历史、方法与世界格局[M].武汉：华中师范大学出版社,1998.
104刘清春,王铮.中国区域经济差异形成的三次地理要素[J].地理研究,2009(2)：430-440.
105刘雪莲.地缘政治学[M].长春：吉林大学出版社,2002.
106罗杰·阿尔特曼[美].衰退中的全球化——金融危机对地缘政治的进一步影响[J].云南师范大学马克思主义理论研究中心译.国外理论动态.2010.
107吕作奎.基于CGE的中国宏观经济模拟系统开发及其应用[D].华东师范大学,2008.
108马晓哲.中国分省碳排放系统—模型和GIS[D]华东师范大学,2010.
109毛锦梅.战后美日贸易摩擦研究[D].苏州大学,2009.
110尼古拉斯·斯皮克曼[美].和平地理学[M].刘愈之,译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.
111倪世雄.当代西方国际关系理论[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2001.
112普雷斯顿·詹姆斯[美].地理学思想史[M].李旭旦,译.北京：商务印书馆,1982.
113桥本寿郎[日].日本经济论.复旦大学日本研究中心译[M].上海：上海财经大学出版,1997.
114沙文兵.人民币实际有效汇率的水平与波动性对就业的影响——基于东部地区面板数据的实证 分析[J].世界经济研究,2009(4)：20-24.
115司马迁[西汉].史记[M].河南：中州古籍出版社,1996.
116宋岩,侯铁珊.关税同盟的贸易效应和纳什均衡分析[J].国际商务——对外经济贸易大学学报,2005(6)：26-30.
117宋岩.规模经济视角下关税同盟福利效应研究.大连理工大学[D], 2006.
118宋玉华,吴聆.关税升级与垄断竞争产业发展：基于空间经济学的分析[J].世界经济,2006(7)：15-27.
119孙武[春秋].孙子兵法[M].昆明：云南教育出版社,2010.
120孙翊,朱艳鑫,王铮.金融危机下国家大规模投资政策模拟[J].地理研究,2010,29(5)：789-800.
121滕丽.GIS环境下的区域溢出研究[D].华东师范大学,2005.
122滕丽,王铮.区域溢出[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.
123万解秋,徐涛.汇率调整对中国就业的影响——基于理论与经验的研究[J].经济研究,2004(2)：39-46.
124王恩涌.地缘政治学为什么又重新兴起[J].中学地理教学参考,1996(12)：37.
125王胜,邹恒甫.不确定情况下的关税、货币政策[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2004(12)：5-18.
126王铮,刘扬.粮食生产受价格影响的模拟分析[J].经济科学,1999(3)：14-23.
127王铮,张焕波..汇率变动与经济危机：人民币汇率问题分析[J].经济科学,2005(5)：72-79.
128王铮,滕丽,蔡砥.资源约束下两区域的增长[J].自然资源学报,2008(4)：581-588.
129王铮,夏海斌,吴静.普通地理学[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.
130王直,王慧炯,李善同等.中国加入世贸组织对世界劳动密集产品市场与美国农业出口的影响-动态递推可计算一般均衡分析[J].经济研究,1997(4)：54-65.
131翁瑾,杨开忠.旅游系统的空间结构：一个具有不对称特点的垄断竞争的空间模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2007(2)：76-82.
132吴兵.中国经济可计算一般均衡分析决策支持系统的研究与应用[D].华东师范大学,2004.
133吴静,王铮,吴兵.石油价格上涨对中国经济的冲击——可计算一般均衡模型分析[J].中国农业大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2)：69-75.
134习罡华.地缘政治与1947-1974年的克什米尔冲突[D].北京大学,2008.
135谢杰.人民币实际汇率升值对中国经济各产业的影响——基于可计算一般均衡模型(CGE)的分析[J].首都经济贸易大学学报,2010(3)：29-36.
136谢书玲.结合GIS的新经济产业地理计算模型研究及应用[D].华东师范大学,2006.
137新华网.奥巴马提出为中产阶级减税计划[EB/OL]. http://www.china.com.cn/news/txt/2010-09/09/content_20893141.htm,2010-09-09.
138许统生.中国进口关税保护的动态成本估计——基于商品价格关联效应的投入产出分析[J].经 济学动态,2009(8)：28-32.
139亚里士多德[古希腊].政治学[M].吴寿彭,译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.
140叶自成.地缘政治与中国外交[M].北京：北京出版社,1998.
141殷广卫,李佶.空间经济学概念及其前沿-新经济地理学发展脉络综述[J].西南民族大学学报,2010(1)：75-82.
142俞乔.论中国汇率政策与国内经济目标的冲突及协调[J].经济研究,1999(7)：23-32.
143袁宇杰.旅游CGE系统开发及应用[D].华东师范大学,2010.
144翟凡,李善同,王直.关税减让、国内税替代及其收入分配效应[J].经济研究,1996(12)：41-50.
145张海藩.软件工程导论(第四版)[M].北京：清华大学出版社,2003.
146张薇薇.冲突与联合：对主导性的地缘政治观的分析与反思[D].吉林大学,2009.
147章士平.中国海权[M].北京：人民日报出版社,1998.
148赵伟,李芬.异质性劳动力流动与区域收入差距：新经济地理学模型的扩展分析[J].中国人口科学,2007(1)：27-35.
149朱里奥·杜黑[意].制空权[M].曹毅风,华人杰,译.北京：解放军出版社,1986.