资产证券化和金融发展、金融稳定关联研究
|
摘要
自从19世纪70年代资产证券化产生以来,资产证券化的发展引起了金融领域的深刻变革,尤其是次贷危机的出现,深入研究资产证券化对金融政策的制定和金融安全的防范,都是具有重要意义的,本文针对资产证券化展开研究,分别针对资产证券化的相关理论进行梳理,针对资产证券化的国际比较和中国历史沿革进行回顾,针对资产证券化和金融稳定、金融发展进行理论分析,构建实证模型,研究资产证券化和金融发展的关系,进行跨国检验,研究资产证券化和金融稳定的关联,文章还针对资产证券化和货币政策效果展开实证研究,文章中采用Granger因果关系检验,协整检验和向量误差修正模型,脉冲响应分析,动态面板数据模型等多种方法进行研究。
文章共分为三个部分,第一部分是资产证券化的相关理论和文献回顾,第二部分是资产证券化的国际比较和历史沿革,第三部分是资产证券化和金融稳定、金融发展、货币政策的实证研究。第一部分包括第一章和第二章,第二部分包括第三章,第三部分包括第四章,第五章和第六章,
第一章是金融体系和资产证券化,本章首先给出金融发展和资产证券化的相关脉络介绍,进一步给出金融发展和资产证券化的理论关联,最后,分析资产证券化对整个经济的作用。本章深入分析了资产证券化产生的7种动因,并针对资产证券化和金融结构,资产证券化和金融市场进行了详细的分析。
第二章是资产证券化和金融稳定,这一章研究资产证券化的交易机制和作用,并分析资产证券化和金融稳定的关系,研究资产证券化对金融稳定的正向积极作用和负向消极影响。认为,资产证券化可以促进金融分工和专业化,能够减少信息不对称的程度,提高金融市场效率优化资本结构,然而,资产证券化也会导致货币政策传导效率降低,增加市场的不确定性,甚至过度创造信用,导致金融风险的可能性增加。
第三章是资产证券化的国际比较和历史沿革,本章的内容是对资产证券化的发展、演进以及国际情况的比较的一个描述性章节,目的是从现实角度分析资产证券化对金融体系、经济发展的作用机制和作用效果,在第三章中,选择美国、日本、韩国的资产证券化进程讨论,从制度、各国特点等角度展开论述,本章的最后给出了我国资产证券化的历程和特点,认为,我国的资产证券化要在完善法律制度的基础上,完善二级市场和金融中介机构,通过政府的扶持来加以推行。
第四章是资产证券化和金融发展:理论和经验证据,本章共分为三节,首先是金融发展的相关指标体系构建,将金融发展指标划分为金融中介发展指标,金融市场发展指标两个部分,进一步给出本章的研究方法,即协整方法和Granger因果关系检验方法,最后,利用协整和Granger因果关系检验针对中国和美国数据来研究金融发展和资产证券化的关系。
本章的主要结论是:
(1)诱致性制度变迁对金融发展产生更为深远的影响
在两种不同的制度推动过程影响下,显然,诱致性制度变迁带来了更加深远的影响,信贷扩张和较高的投资收益率促使美国企业和金融行业产生了对证券化产品的需求,信贷扩张和实际利率对资产证券化具有长期的稳定正向推动作用,中国的资产证券化过程则没有体现出更为规律的特征,证券化进程会对金融发展形成影响。
(2)不同的制度变迁结果形成不同的作用机制
从资产证券化对金融发展的作用机制来看,由制度需求产生的制度变迁对金融发展指标都产生了稳定的长期影响,证券化指标的冲击将导致实际利率的负向变化,同样的,证券化指标会带来信贷规模的正向反应,导致股票市场流动性增强,同时也会提高金融深化程度。而强制性的金融创新带来的结果则不同,证券化指标的冲击除了导致股票市场流动性增强之外,对其余金融发展指标没有形成长期稳定的冲击结果。
原因在于金融系统的内在需求产生的金融创新,从金融中介机构到信用评级机构到金融市场,整个金融体系处于一种相对高效的运作过程,这样必然会促进金融发展和金融效率。然而对于强制性的制度变迁,金融体系中的各个环节并不能充分适应这种金融创新带来的改变,因此,金融创新不能发挥充分的作用。
(3)资产证券化和金融深化可以相互替代
在诱致性制度变迁的制度创新中,资产证券化作为信用扩张的方式之一,和金融深化指标具有类似的作用,因此,二者具有替代作用,然而,由于强制性制度变迁的出现,资产证券化带来的金融资产数量增加要求更多的货币参与金融系统的交易中来,这就导致资产证券化过程需要更多的货币与之互补,此时二者的关系是互补的。
第五章是资产证券化和金融稳定:实证研究,本章第一部分给出金融稳定的评价指标体系,第二部分构建计量经济学模型,利用动态面板数据分析方法研究各国金融稳定和资产证券化的动态关联,第三部分进行实证研究,给出研究结论,最后针对金融稳定和资产证券化的关联给出分析的具体结果。
本章的结论如下:
(1)证券化具有自我推动的机制
总体来看,证券化率受到实际利率、通货膨胀率的反向影响,受到经济增长率的正向推动,动态面板数据模型的估计结果表明,证券化率水平具有自我促进的路径依赖特征和机制。
(2)不同国家的证券化原因不同
发达的工业国家证券化过程是经济发展的自然结果,和银行经营性指标以及经济波动情况关联并不显著,而发展中的新兴市场经济国家的资产证券化进程则主要是为了解决商业银行的经营问题而出现的强制性制度变迁结果。
(3)证券化率的提高并不会增加商业银行的经营风险
证券化率的变化并不会影响商业银行的经营状态,仅仅会影响经济增长的水平,同样的,证券化率对通货膨胀的影响存在一定的作用,然而这种影响并不显著,实际利率的变化和证券化率无关,因此,没有原因证明,证券化率的提高引发了商业银行的经营效果变差的事实,证券化并非金融危机的原因,金融危机的根本原因在于信用危机,而不是证券化。
第六章是资产证券化和货币政策、流动性关联。本章分为三部分,首先分析资产证券化对货币政策效果影响的理论,进一步给出资产证券化和货币政策效果的实证检验结果,最后针对资产证券化和货币政策的关联机制给出结论和建议。
对资产证券化和货币政策的关联研究结果表明:(1)资产证券化的发展要求经济中合理的货币量水平,流动性本身就过剩,名义经济和实体经济关联较弱的经济体,资产证券化不会产生较好的效果,(2)不同的制度变迁形式,资产证券化对货币政策的作用效果是不同的,诱致性制度变迁的资产证券化货币政策的效果会削弱,而强制性制度变迁的资产证券化货币政策效果会增强,(3)信贷水平和证券化既具有替代关系又存在互补的可能,诱致性制度变迁的资产证券化会造成货币政策的信贷渠道效果降低,而强制性制度变迁的资产证券化结果则会导致货币政策的信贷渠道效果改善。
综上所述,我们认为,在经济中具有合理流动性、货币政策调控手段成熟的国家,资产证券化具有较好的效果,作为制度变迁的结果,诱致性制度变迁会产生较好的演进结果。因此,首先要解决流动性过剩的问题,充分考虑企业和金融中介的制度需求选择合理的制度形式,是证券化之前要进行的重要工作,在证券化进程中,加强对金融中介的监管,尤其是加强对证券化产品的监管是重要的。
The development of asset securitization which began in 1970s has caused profound changes in finance. It is a great significance to study asset securitization to the establishment of finance policy and precaution of finance security. In the article, we study asset securitization from relative theory, international comparison and the review of Chinese research; then, build empirical model to test the relationship between asset securitization and finance development, the relationship between asset securitization and finance stability by international test on the theory analysis, besides, this article make a empirical study between asset securitization and effect of currency policies. In this paper, Granger causality test, cointegration test and vector error correction model, impulse responses analysis, dynamic panel data model and other methods are used.
We divide this paper into three parts. The first one is relative theory and article review, which includes chapter 1 and 2; the second part is international comparison and research history, which is in the third chapter; the third part is the empirical analysis about asset securitization between finance stability, finance development and monetary policy, it consists of chapter 4, 5 and 6.
The first chapter is about finance system and asset securitization, we first introduce relevant context, then give the theoretical relevance of finance development and asset securitization, finally, analyze asset securitization to the whole economy. This chapter in-depth studies 7 motivations of asset securitization and the relationship between asset securitization and finance structure, finance market.
The following chapter is about asset securitization and finance stability. Based on the trading mechanism and role of asset securitization, we get the relationship about it to finance stability. The positive one is asset securitization can enhance finance labor division and specialization, reduce information asymmetry, improve efficiency of finance market and optimize capital structure. Although, it also reduces monetary policy spreading efficiency, increases market uncertainty, creates excessive credit, leading to increased possibility of finance risk.
The Third chapter is international comparison and history of asset securitization. It is a descriptive chapter about asset securitization development, evolution and international comparison, aimed to study the mechanism and effect about it to finance system and finance development from a practical point of view. We analyze the asset securitization process of the United States, Japan and South Korea from institution, characteristics and other aspects. From above discussions, the chapter gives the history and features of Chinese asset securitization, and makes the conclusion that the development of asset securitization of our country needs the improvement of legal system, secondary market, finance intermediaries, and the support of government.
Theoretical and empirical evidences of asset securitization to finance development are in the forth chapter. And in it, we divide into three sections, the first one is relative index systems of finance development, which includes intermediary indicators and market indicators; then are research methods, include cointegration test and Granger causality test; and finally, we use these methods to analyze the relationship between finance development and asset securitization by data of China and the United States.
The main conclusions of this chapter are as following:
(1) Induced institutional changes lead to deep impact to finance development
Under different institutions of China and the United States, apparently, the induced one changes lead to deep impact. Credit expansion and higher investment return promote American corporations and finance industry creating a demand to securitized products, credit expansion and higher real interest rates make a long-term stable positive promoting role on asset securitization. But in China, the process is not embodied some rule character. And we get that, the process of asset securitization has a impact to finance development.
(2) Different results of institution changes come into being different mechanisms
From mechanism of asset securitization to finance development, the institution changes originate from demands has had a stable long-term effect on finance development indicators. The impact of securitization indicators leads to a negative change of real interest rate; similarly, it also leads to a positive reaction of credit, resulting into stock market liquidity increasing, also the degree of finance deepening.
Differently with above, the enforceable finance innovation has different results. The impact of securitization index only leads to stock market liquidity increasing,
But no long-term stable impact to finance development index.
The reason is that, when the finance innovation is endogenetic, the entire finance system, from finance intermediaries to credit reference agencies, finance market, is in a relatively efficient operation process, certainly, this will promote finance development and finance efficiency. However, in the enforceable one, all segments do not fully adapt to changes bring about finance innovation; therefore, finance innovation can not play a full role.
(3) Asset securitization and finance deepening can be replaced by each other
With the induced institution innovation, asset securitization as one form of credit expansion, has a similar effect to finance deepening index, so, they are a relationship of substitution. However, with enforceable institution change, the increased finance asset generated from asset securitization involves more currency into transactions, which results in the process of asset securitization need more currency to complement, so, they are complementary this time.
Chapter V is the empirical research of asset securitization and finance stability.
The first section is the evaluation index system of finance stability; the second part is building econometric models, analyzing the dynamic association of finance stability and asset securitization using dynamic panel data. The third part makes empirical study, gives the conclusions and finally gives the specific results between finance stability and asset securitization.
This chapter gets following conclusions:
(1) Securitization is self-promotion
Overall, securitization is reversely effected by real interest rate and inflation rate; however, positively by economy growth. The results of dynamic panel data model estimate show that the level of securitization rate has the path dependence feature and mechanism of self-Promotion.
(2) The reason of securitization is different in different countries
The process of securitization in developed industrial countries is the natural result of economic development, and is little significant to bank running index and economic fluctuations. But in developing countries, it is an enforceable institution change result of mainly solving the operation problems of commercial banks.
(3) the increase of securitization rate does not raise commercial banks operation risk
Securitization rate changes do not affect operation state of commercial banks, affect economic growth only. Similarly, securitization has some effect to inflation, but it is not significant; besides, real interest rate has no connection with securitization rate. So, there is no reason to show that the increase of securitization rate leading to commercial banks deterioration; in addition, securitization is not the cause of finance crisis, and the fundamental reason is the credit crisis, not securitization.
Chapter VI is mainly about securitization and currency policy, liquidity
We divide this chapter into three parts; in the chapter, we firstly analyze the theory about asset securitization and the effect of monetary policy, and give the empirical result of them further; finally, is some conclusions and recommendations of related mechanism.
The study of asset securitization and monetary policy shows that: (1) The development of asset securitization requires a reasonable amount of currency, and liquidity itself namely excessive; in addition, asset securitization does not mean good result in the country which virtual economy has a week association with real economy. (2) Different forms of institution change, the effect of asset securitization and monetary policy is different; under the condition of induced institution change, the effect of the monetary policy which is affected by asset securitization will be undermined; but enforceable one, it will be enhanced.(3)the credit level and securitization has a relationship of both alternative and complementary, under the condition of induced institution change, the effect of credit channel which is affected by asset securitization will be undermined; but enforceable one, it also will be improved.
In summary, we believe that a country which liquidity is reasonable and monetary policy instruments is mature, asset securitization has a good effect; as a result of institution change, induced institutional change will have a better evolution. Therefore, we must first solve the problem of excessive liquidity, then fully consider system requirement of business and finance intermediation, and choose reasonable institution, which are important works prior to asset securitization. So, in the process of securitization, it is important to strengthen finance intermediaries supervision, especially the supervision of securitization products.
文章共分为三个部分,第一部分是资产证券化的相关理论和文献回顾,第二部分是资产证券化的国际比较和历史沿革,第三部分是资产证券化和金融稳定、金融发展、货币政策的实证研究。第一部分包括第一章和第二章,第二部分包括第三章,第三部分包括第四章,第五章和第六章,
第一章是金融体系和资产证券化,本章首先给出金融发展和资产证券化的相关脉络介绍,进一步给出金融发展和资产证券化的理论关联,最后,分析资产证券化对整个经济的作用。本章深入分析了资产证券化产生的7种动因,并针对资产证券化和金融结构,资产证券化和金融市场进行了详细的分析。
第二章是资产证券化和金融稳定,这一章研究资产证券化的交易机制和作用,并分析资产证券化和金融稳定的关系,研究资产证券化对金融稳定的正向积极作用和负向消极影响。认为,资产证券化可以促进金融分工和专业化,能够减少信息不对称的程度,提高金融市场效率优化资本结构,然而,资产证券化也会导致货币政策传导效率降低,增加市场的不确定性,甚至过度创造信用,导致金融风险的可能性增加。
第三章是资产证券化的国际比较和历史沿革,本章的内容是对资产证券化的发展、演进以及国际情况的比较的一个描述性章节,目的是从现实角度分析资产证券化对金融体系、经济发展的作用机制和作用效果,在第三章中,选择美国、日本、韩国的资产证券化进程讨论,从制度、各国特点等角度展开论述,本章的最后给出了我国资产证券化的历程和特点,认为,我国的资产证券化要在完善法律制度的基础上,完善二级市场和金融中介机构,通过政府的扶持来加以推行。
第四章是资产证券化和金融发展:理论和经验证据,本章共分为三节,首先是金融发展的相关指标体系构建,将金融发展指标划分为金融中介发展指标,金融市场发展指标两个部分,进一步给出本章的研究方法,即协整方法和Granger因果关系检验方法,最后,利用协整和Granger因果关系检验针对中国和美国数据来研究金融发展和资产证券化的关系。
本章的主要结论是:
(1)诱致性制度变迁对金融发展产生更为深远的影响
在两种不同的制度推动过程影响下,显然,诱致性制度变迁带来了更加深远的影响,信贷扩张和较高的投资收益率促使美国企业和金融行业产生了对证券化产品的需求,信贷扩张和实际利率对资产证券化具有长期的稳定正向推动作用,中国的资产证券化过程则没有体现出更为规律的特征,证券化进程会对金融发展形成影响。
(2)不同的制度变迁结果形成不同的作用机制
从资产证券化对金融发展的作用机制来看,由制度需求产生的制度变迁对金融发展指标都产生了稳定的长期影响,证券化指标的冲击将导致实际利率的负向变化,同样的,证券化指标会带来信贷规模的正向反应,导致股票市场流动性增强,同时也会提高金融深化程度。而强制性的金融创新带来的结果则不同,证券化指标的冲击除了导致股票市场流动性增强之外,对其余金融发展指标没有形成长期稳定的冲击结果。
原因在于金融系统的内在需求产生的金融创新,从金融中介机构到信用评级机构到金融市场,整个金融体系处于一种相对高效的运作过程,这样必然会促进金融发展和金融效率。然而对于强制性的制度变迁,金融体系中的各个环节并不能充分适应这种金融创新带来的改变,因此,金融创新不能发挥充分的作用。
(3)资产证券化和金融深化可以相互替代
在诱致性制度变迁的制度创新中,资产证券化作为信用扩张的方式之一,和金融深化指标具有类似的作用,因此,二者具有替代作用,然而,由于强制性制度变迁的出现,资产证券化带来的金融资产数量增加要求更多的货币参与金融系统的交易中来,这就导致资产证券化过程需要更多的货币与之互补,此时二者的关系是互补的。
第五章是资产证券化和金融稳定:实证研究,本章第一部分给出金融稳定的评价指标体系,第二部分构建计量经济学模型,利用动态面板数据分析方法研究各国金融稳定和资产证券化的动态关联,第三部分进行实证研究,给出研究结论,最后针对金融稳定和资产证券化的关联给出分析的具体结果。
本章的结论如下:
(1)证券化具有自我推动的机制
总体来看,证券化率受到实际利率、通货膨胀率的反向影响,受到经济增长率的正向推动,动态面板数据模型的估计结果表明,证券化率水平具有自我促进的路径依赖特征和机制。
(2)不同国家的证券化原因不同
发达的工业国家证券化过程是经济发展的自然结果,和银行经营性指标以及经济波动情况关联并不显著,而发展中的新兴市场经济国家的资产证券化进程则主要是为了解决商业银行的经营问题而出现的强制性制度变迁结果。
(3)证券化率的提高并不会增加商业银行的经营风险
证券化率的变化并不会影响商业银行的经营状态,仅仅会影响经济增长的水平,同样的,证券化率对通货膨胀的影响存在一定的作用,然而这种影响并不显著,实际利率的变化和证券化率无关,因此,没有原因证明,证券化率的提高引发了商业银行的经营效果变差的事实,证券化并非金融危机的原因,金融危机的根本原因在于信用危机,而不是证券化。
第六章是资产证券化和货币政策、流动性关联。本章分为三部分,首先分析资产证券化对货币政策效果影响的理论,进一步给出资产证券化和货币政策效果的实证检验结果,最后针对资产证券化和货币政策的关联机制给出结论和建议。
对资产证券化和货币政策的关联研究结果表明:(1)资产证券化的发展要求经济中合理的货币量水平,流动性本身就过剩,名义经济和实体经济关联较弱的经济体,资产证券化不会产生较好的效果,(2)不同的制度变迁形式,资产证券化对货币政策的作用效果是不同的,诱致性制度变迁的资产证券化货币政策的效果会削弱,而强制性制度变迁的资产证券化货币政策效果会增强,(3)信贷水平和证券化既具有替代关系又存在互补的可能,诱致性制度变迁的资产证券化会造成货币政策的信贷渠道效果降低,而强制性制度变迁的资产证券化结果则会导致货币政策的信贷渠道效果改善。
综上所述,我们认为,在经济中具有合理流动性、货币政策调控手段成熟的国家,资产证券化具有较好的效果,作为制度变迁的结果,诱致性制度变迁会产生较好的演进结果。因此,首先要解决流动性过剩的问题,充分考虑企业和金融中介的制度需求选择合理的制度形式,是证券化之前要进行的重要工作,在证券化进程中,加强对金融中介的监管,尤其是加强对证券化产品的监管是重要的。
The development of asset securitization which began in 1970s has caused profound changes in finance. It is a great significance to study asset securitization to the establishment of finance policy and precaution of finance security. In the article, we study asset securitization from relative theory, international comparison and the review of Chinese research; then, build empirical model to test the relationship between asset securitization and finance development, the relationship between asset securitization and finance stability by international test on the theory analysis, besides, this article make a empirical study between asset securitization and effect of currency policies. In this paper, Granger causality test, cointegration test and vector error correction model, impulse responses analysis, dynamic panel data model and other methods are used.
We divide this paper into three parts. The first one is relative theory and article review, which includes chapter 1 and 2; the second part is international comparison and research history, which is in the third chapter; the third part is the empirical analysis about asset securitization between finance stability, finance development and monetary policy, it consists of chapter 4, 5 and 6.
The first chapter is about finance system and asset securitization, we first introduce relevant context, then give the theoretical relevance of finance development and asset securitization, finally, analyze asset securitization to the whole economy. This chapter in-depth studies 7 motivations of asset securitization and the relationship between asset securitization and finance structure, finance market.
The following chapter is about asset securitization and finance stability. Based on the trading mechanism and role of asset securitization, we get the relationship about it to finance stability. The positive one is asset securitization can enhance finance labor division and specialization, reduce information asymmetry, improve efficiency of finance market and optimize capital structure. Although, it also reduces monetary policy spreading efficiency, increases market uncertainty, creates excessive credit, leading to increased possibility of finance risk.
The Third chapter is international comparison and history of asset securitization. It is a descriptive chapter about asset securitization development, evolution and international comparison, aimed to study the mechanism and effect about it to finance system and finance development from a practical point of view. We analyze the asset securitization process of the United States, Japan and South Korea from institution, characteristics and other aspects. From above discussions, the chapter gives the history and features of Chinese asset securitization, and makes the conclusion that the development of asset securitization of our country needs the improvement of legal system, secondary market, finance intermediaries, and the support of government.
Theoretical and empirical evidences of asset securitization to finance development are in the forth chapter. And in it, we divide into three sections, the first one is relative index systems of finance development, which includes intermediary indicators and market indicators; then are research methods, include cointegration test and Granger causality test; and finally, we use these methods to analyze the relationship between finance development and asset securitization by data of China and the United States.
The main conclusions of this chapter are as following:
(1) Induced institutional changes lead to deep impact to finance development
Under different institutions of China and the United States, apparently, the induced one changes lead to deep impact. Credit expansion and higher investment return promote American corporations and finance industry creating a demand to securitized products, credit expansion and higher real interest rates make a long-term stable positive promoting role on asset securitization. But in China, the process is not embodied some rule character. And we get that, the process of asset securitization has a impact to finance development.
(2) Different results of institution changes come into being different mechanisms
From mechanism of asset securitization to finance development, the institution changes originate from demands has had a stable long-term effect on finance development indicators. The impact of securitization indicators leads to a negative change of real interest rate; similarly, it also leads to a positive reaction of credit, resulting into stock market liquidity increasing, also the degree of finance deepening.
Differently with above, the enforceable finance innovation has different results. The impact of securitization index only leads to stock market liquidity increasing,
But no long-term stable impact to finance development index.
The reason is that, when the finance innovation is endogenetic, the entire finance system, from finance intermediaries to credit reference agencies, finance market, is in a relatively efficient operation process, certainly, this will promote finance development and finance efficiency. However, in the enforceable one, all segments do not fully adapt to changes bring about finance innovation; therefore, finance innovation can not play a full role.
(3) Asset securitization and finance deepening can be replaced by each other
With the induced institution innovation, asset securitization as one form of credit expansion, has a similar effect to finance deepening index, so, they are a relationship of substitution. However, with enforceable institution change, the increased finance asset generated from asset securitization involves more currency into transactions, which results in the process of asset securitization need more currency to complement, so, they are complementary this time.
Chapter V is the empirical research of asset securitization and finance stability.
The first section is the evaluation index system of finance stability; the second part is building econometric models, analyzing the dynamic association of finance stability and asset securitization using dynamic panel data. The third part makes empirical study, gives the conclusions and finally gives the specific results between finance stability and asset securitization.
This chapter gets following conclusions:
(1) Securitization is self-promotion
Overall, securitization is reversely effected by real interest rate and inflation rate; however, positively by economy growth. The results of dynamic panel data model estimate show that the level of securitization rate has the path dependence feature and mechanism of self-Promotion.
(2) The reason of securitization is different in different countries
The process of securitization in developed industrial countries is the natural result of economic development, and is little significant to bank running index and economic fluctuations. But in developing countries, it is an enforceable institution change result of mainly solving the operation problems of commercial banks.
(3) the increase of securitization rate does not raise commercial banks operation risk
Securitization rate changes do not affect operation state of commercial banks, affect economic growth only. Similarly, securitization has some effect to inflation, but it is not significant; besides, real interest rate has no connection with securitization rate. So, there is no reason to show that the increase of securitization rate leading to commercial banks deterioration; in addition, securitization is not the cause of finance crisis, and the fundamental reason is the credit crisis, not securitization.
Chapter VI is mainly about securitization and currency policy, liquidity
We divide this chapter into three parts; in the chapter, we firstly analyze the theory about asset securitization and the effect of monetary policy, and give the empirical result of them further; finally, is some conclusions and recommendations of related mechanism.
The study of asset securitization and monetary policy shows that: (1) The development of asset securitization requires a reasonable amount of currency, and liquidity itself namely excessive; in addition, asset securitization does not mean good result in the country which virtual economy has a week association with real economy. (2) Different forms of institution change, the effect of asset securitization and monetary policy is different; under the condition of induced institution change, the effect of the monetary policy which is affected by asset securitization will be undermined; but enforceable one, it will be enhanced.(3)the credit level and securitization has a relationship of both alternative and complementary, under the condition of induced institution change, the effect of credit channel which is affected by asset securitization will be undermined; but enforceable one, it also will be improved.
In summary, we believe that a country which liquidity is reasonable and monetary policy instruments is mature, asset securitization has a good effect; as a result of institution change, induced institutional change will have a better evolution. Therefore, we must first solve the problem of excessive liquidity, then fully consider system requirement of business and finance intermediation, and choose reasonable institution, which are important works prior to asset securitization. So, in the process of securitization, it is important to strengthen finance intermediaries supervision, especially the supervision of securitization products.
引文
[1] Bartlett W W, Dearden F. Mortgage-backed securities: products, analysis, trading[M]. New York Institute of Finance,1989.
[2] Jobst A A. The pricing puzzle: the default term structure of collateralised loan obligations[M]. CFS,2002.
[3] Kendall L T, Fishman M J. A primer on securitization[M]. the MIT press,2000.
[4]何小锋.资产证券化:中国的模式[M].北京大学出版社,2002.
[5]于凤坤.资产证券化:理论与实务[M].北京大学出版社,2002.
[6]张超英,翟祥辉.资产证券化:原理实务实例[M].经济科学出版社,1998.
[7] Chen Q. CDO Pricing and Copula Method[R]. working paper, University of Maryland,2006.
[8]杲永亮.资产证券化及其在我国的发展研究[D].上海:华东师范大学,2006.
[9]何应期.我国资产证券化的可行性分析[D].成都:四川大学,2005.
[10]侯及.资产证券化与我国金融结构革新[D].成都:四川大学,2007.
[11]刘红.我国资产证券化发展研究[D].合肥:安徽农业大学,2009.
[12]刘娟娟.资产证券化信息披露制度研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学,2010.
[13]吕川.资产证券化对金融体系的影响研究[D].武汉:华中科技大学,2006.
[14]王保岳.资产证券化风险研究[D].北京:中国社会科学院研究生院,2009.
[15]王心如.资产证券化与金融稳定的关联性研究[D].长春:吉林大学,2010.
[16]王志斌.货币政策、信贷政策、资产证券化、收入分配与次贷危机:一个文献综述[D].济南:山东大学,2010.
[17]张超英.资产证券化的本质和效应[D].上海:复旦大学,2004.
[18]张峰.资产证券化研究[D].北京:中共中央党校,2003.
[19]张洁.资产证券化及其风险研究[D].长春:吉林大学,2006.
[20] Albanese C, Chen O, Dalessandro A, et al. Dynamic credit correlation modeling[J]. preprint,2005.
[21] Albrecher H, Ladoucette S, Schoutens W. A generic one-factor Lévy model for pricing synthetic CDOs[J]. Advances in Mathematical Finance,2007:259-277.
[22] Ambrose B W, Buttimer R J, Capone C A. Pricing mortgage default and foreclosure delay[J]. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking,1997,29(3):314-325.
[23] Archer W R, Ling D C. Pricing Mortgage‐Backed Securities: Integrating Optimal Call and Empirical Models of Prepayment[J]. Real Estate Economics,1993,21(4):373-404.
[24] Baums T, Wymeersch E. Asset-backed securitization in Europe[J]. 1996.
[25] Benjamin J D, Heuson A J, Sirmans C F. The effect of origination strategies on the pricingof fixed-rate mortgage loans[J]. Journal of Housing Research,1995,6(1):137.
[26] Benston G J. The future of asset securitization: the benefits and costs of breaking up the bank[J]. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,1992,5(1):71-82.
[27] Black D G, Garbade K D, Silber W L. The impact of the GNMA pass-through program on FHA mortgage costs[J]. The Journal of Finance,1981,36(2):457-469.
[28] Boswell C. Migration Control in Europe After 9/11: Explaining the Absence of Securitization*[J]. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies,2007,45(3):589-610.
[29] Boudoukh J, Whitelaw R F, Richardson M, et al. Pricing mortgage-backed securities in a multifactor interest rate environment: A multivariate density estimation approach[J]. Review of Financial Studies,1997,10(2):405.
[30] Breeden D T. An intertemporal asset pricing model with stochastic consumption and investment opportunities[J]. Journal of Financial Economics,1979,7(3):265-296.
[31] Brennan M J, Schwartz E S. Determinants of GNMA mortgage prices[J]. Real Estate Economics,1985,13(3):209-228.
[32] Buonfino A. Between unity and plurality: the politicization and securitization of the discourse of immigration in Europe[J]. New Political Science,2004,26(1):23-49.
[33] Burtschell X, Gregory J, Laurent J P. A comparative analysis of CDO pricing models[J]. preprint,2005.
[34] Calem P S, Lacour-Little M. Risk-based capital requirements for mortgage loans[J]. Journal of Banking & Finance,2004,28(3):647-672.
[35] Chari V V, Jagannathan R. Adverse selection in a model of real estate lending[J]. The Journal of Finance,1989,44(2):499-508.
[36] Cumming C. The economics of securitization[J]. Quarterly Review,1987(Aut):11-23.
[37] Demarzo P, Duffie D. A liquidity‐ based model of security design[J]. Econometrica,1999,67(1):65-99.
[38] Deng Y, Quigley J M, Van Order R, et al. Mortgage default and low downpayment loans: the costs of public subsidy[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1996,26(3-4):263-285.
[39] Donahoo K, Shaffer S. Capital requirements and the securitization decision[J]. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Business,1991,31(4):12-24.
[40] Dunn K B, Mcconnell J J. A comparison of alternative models for pricing GNMA mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1981,36(2):471-484.
[41] Dunn K B, Mcconnell J J. Valuation of GNMA mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1981,36(3):599-616.
[42] Dunn K B, Singleton K J. An Empirical Analysis of the Pricing of Mortgage-Backed Securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1983,38(2):613-623.
[43] Dunn K B, Spatt C S. An analysis of mortgage contracting: Prepayment penalties and the due-on-sale clause[J]. The Journal of Finance,1985,40(1):293-308.
[44] Dunn K B, Spatt C S. Call options, points, and dominance restrictions on debt contracts[J].The Journal of Finance,1999,54(6):2317-2337.
[45] Eberlein E, Frey R, Hammerstein E A. Advanced credit portfolio modeling and CDO pricing[J]. Mathematics–Key Technology for the Future,2008:253-279.
[46] Epperson J F, Kau J B, Keenan D C, et al. Pricing default risk in mortgages[J]. Real Estate Economics,1985,13(3):261-272.
[47] Foster C, Order R. FHA terminations: A prelude to rational mortgage pricing[J]. Real Estate Economics, 1985,13(3):273-291.
[48] Frey R, Mcneil A J. Dependent defaults in models of portfolio credit risk[J]. Journal of Risk,2003,6:59-92.
[49] Frost C W. Asset Securitization and Corporate Risk Allocation[J]. Tul. L. Rev.,1997,72:101-2239.
[50] Hamilton D T, Gupton G, Berthault A. Default and recovery rates of corporate bond issuers: 2000[J]. Moody’s investors service,2001.
[51] Hamilton D, Varma P, Ou S, et al. Default and recovery rates of corporate bond issuers, 1920-2004[J]. Moodys Investors Services,2005.
[52] Hendershott P H, Van Order R. Integration of mortgage and capital markets and the accumulation of residential capital[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1989,19(2):189-210.
[53] Hess A C, Smith C W. Elements of mortgage securitization[J]. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics,1988,1(4):331-346.
[54] Hull J C. Options, futures, and derivatives[J]. Dynamical Systems and Statistical Mechanics, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,1997.
[55] Iacobucci E M, Winter R A. Asset securitization and asymmetric information[J]. J. Legal Stud.,2005,34:161-631.
[56] Ingersoll J. An examination of corporate call policies on convertible securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1977,32(2):463-478.
[57] Jarrow R A, Yu F. Counterparty risk and the pricing of defaultable securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,2001,56(5):1765-1799.
[58] Kalemanova A, Schmid B, Werner R. The normal inverse Gaussian distribution for synthetic CDO pricing[J]. Journal of Derivatives,2007,14(3):80.
[59] Kang P, Zenios S A. Complete prepayment models for mortgage-backed securities[J]. Management Science,1992,38(11):1665-1685.
[60] Kariya T, Kobayashi M. Pricing mortgage-backed securities (MBS)[J]. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets,2000,7(2):189-204.
[61] Kau J B, Keenan D C, Muller Iii W J, et al. A Generalized Valuation Model for Fixed-Rate Residential Mortgages.[J]. Journal of Money, Credit & Banking,1992,24(3).
[62] Kendall L T, Fishman M J. A Primer on Securitization[J]. Finance & Development,1997:52.
[63] Kolari J W, Fraser D R, Anari A. The effects of securitization on mortgage market yields: A cointegration analysis[J]. Real Estate Economics,1998,26(4):677-693.
[64] Lahny Iv P J. Asset Securitization: A Discussion of the Traditional Bankruptcy Attacks and an Analysis of the Next Potential Attack, Substantive Consolidation[J]. Am. Bankr. Inst. L. Rev.,2001,9:815.
[65] Li D X, Correlation O D. A Copula Function Approach[J]. Journal of Fixed Income,2000,9(4):43-54.
[66] Li D X, Liang M. CDO2 squared pricing using Gaussian mixture model with transformation of loss distribution[J]. Barclays Capital, Quantitative Analytics Global Credit Derivatives,2005.
[67] Liu B, Skully M. The determinants of mortgage yield spread differentials: Securitization[J]. Journal of Multinational Financial Management,2005,15(4-5):314-333.
[68] Loader I. Policing, securitization and democratization in Europe[J]. Criminology and Criminal Justice,2002,2(2):125.
[69] Lupica L R. Asset Securitization: The Unsecured Creditor's Perspective[J]. Tex. L. Rev.,1997,76:595.
[70] Meador M. The effects of mortgage laws on home mortgage rates[J]. Journal of Economics and Business,1982,34(2):143-148.
[71] Minton B, Opler T, Stanton S. Asset Securitization among industrial firms[J]. Unpublished paper, Ohio State University,1999.
[72] Naranjo A, Toevs A. The effects of purchases of mortgages and securitization by government sponsored enterprises on mortgage yield spreads and volatility[J]. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics,2002,25(2):173-195.
[73] Kane D, Schloegl L. Modelling credit: Theory and practice[J]. Lehman Brothers Analytical Research Series,2001.
[74] Peixoto F M. Valuation of a homogeneous collateralized debt obligation[J]. Masters in Mathematical Finance, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada,2004.
[75] Richard S F, Roll R. Prepayments on fixed-rate mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Portfolio Management,1989,15(3):73-82.
[76] Rosenthal J A, Ocampo J M. Analyzing the economic benefits of securitized credit[J]. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,1988,1(3):32-44.
[77] Rubinstein M. An aggregation theorem for securities markets* 1[J]. Journal of Financial Economics,1974,1(3):225-244.
[78] Sch Nbucher P J. Credit Derivatives Pricing Models: Models[J]. Pricing and Implementation, Jon Wiley and Sons, New York,2003.
[79] Schwarcz S L. Alchemy of Asset Securitization, The[J]. Stan. JL Bus. & Fin.,1994,1:133.
[80] Schwarcz S L. Global Alchemy of Asset Securitization, The[J]. Int'l Fin. L. Rev.,1995,14:30.
[81] Schwartz E S, Torous W N. Prepayment and the valuation of mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1989,44(2):375-392.
[82] Schwartz E S, Torous W N. Prepayment, default, and the valuation of mortgage pass-through securities[J]. The Journal of Business,1992,65(2):221-239.
[83] Schwartz E S, Torous W N. Prepayment, default, and the valuation of mortgage pass-through securities[J]. The Journal of Business,1992,65(2):221-239.
[84] Sirmans C F, Benjamin J D. Pricing fixed rate mortgages: Some empirical evidence[J]. Journal of Financial Services Research,1990,4(3):191-202.
[85] Stanton R. Rational prepayment and the valuation of mortgage-backed securities[J]. Review of Financial Studies,1995,8(3):677.
[86] Thurbull S M. An Empirical Analysis of the Pricing of Mortgage-Backed Securities: Discussion[J]. The Journal of Finance,1983,38(2):646-647.
[87]宾融.中美不良资产证券化的对比分析[J].财贸经济,2002(005):55-58.
[88]陈柏东.住房抵押贷款支撑证券定价方法研究[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2005(002):40-46.
[89]陈金霞.资产证券化的效应分析[J].南京财经大学学报,2005(005):59-61.
[90]陈凌白.后次贷危机时代我国资产证券化发展现状与展望[J].辽宁大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2010,38(005):133-137.
[91]陈裘逸,张保华.资产证券化定义和模式的检讨—以真实出售为中心[J].金融研究,2003:53-62.
[92]陈晓东.近年国内学术界关于资产证券化问题的研究综述——资产证券化问题研究之一[J].生产力研究,2004(002):189-191.
[93]陈颖,屠梅曾.国外住房抵押贷款支持证券定价理论的方法研究[J].中国房地产金融,2004:43-46.
[94]陈钊.美国住房抵押贷款证券化的现状:兼议我国推行住房抵押贷款证券化的可行性[J].金融研究,2000:129-134.
[95]程虎.关于我国资产证券化若干问题的探讨[J].国际贸易问题,2002,8(8).
[96]迟君辉.我国资产证券化发展的现状与风险防范分析[J].国际商务研究,2010(003):43-50.
[97]段炜,刘捷.试论资产证券化定义及其经济内涵[J].当代经济,2002,10.
[98]凡言.美国资产证券化的理论与实践[J].河南金融管理干部学院学报,2000(004):52-55.
[99]傅斌.我国银行资产证券化的关键环节及制度条件[J].金融研究,2000(004):80-88.
[100]何德旭.银行不良资产证券化:若干判断与分析[J].财贸经济,2000(008):34-43.
[101]何小峰,宋秀芳.对资产证券化税收制度安排的博弈论分析[J].经济科学,2001(006):21-26.
[102]何晓行.金融市场系统风险与资产证券化的相关性[J].财经科学,2010,4.
[103]何燕芳.金融危机背景下我国资产证券化风险控制问题探析[J]. JOURNAL OF SHANGQIU VOCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE,2009,8(6).
[104]贺显南,荆晶.日韩资产证券化发展及其启示[J].国际经贸探索,2008,24(008):41-45.
[105]姜新旺,黄劲松.CreditMetrics模型及其对我国商业银行的适用性[J].统计与决策, 2005:107-108.
[106]柯健.资产证券化的风险及其防范与化解[J].上海金融学院学报,2009(004):9-15.
[107]孔小伟.资产证券化与中国的金融发展[J].南方金融,2010(001):60-62.
[108]黎志成,艾毓斌.资产支持证券定价模型研究[J].武汉金融,2004(004):32-34.
[109]李大鹏,陈伟忠.基于无套利理论的MBS市场价值定价方法研究[J]. FINANCE TEACHING AND RESEARCH,2006.
[110]李稷文.我国资产证券化的实践,难点及政策建议[J].南昌工程学院学报,2007,26:97-101.
[111]李佳.资产证券化对金融市场流动性的影响[J].经济论坛,2010,12.
[112]李佳,王晓.资产证券化对金融稳定影响的研究评述[J].河南师范大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2010(001):129-132.
[113]李嘉焱,陶长高.资本市场,资产证券化与我国银行经营[J].国际融资,2006(011):32-34.
[114]李兴法,王庆石.基于CreditMetrics模型的商业银行信用风险应用研究[J].财经问题研究,2006(012):47-53.
[115]梁钧,胡南.资产证券化的收益和成本[J].上海金融,2000(003):35-37.
[116]梁志峰.资产证券化的金融创新理论研究综述[J].南华大学学报:社会科学版,2006,7(003):21-24.
[117]刘传哲,史国庆.住房抵押贷款支持证券定价模型的发展与启示[J].国际金融研究,2006:24-29.
[118]刘健.加拿大的资产证券化和市场观察[J].杭州金融研修学院学报,2004(10):58-59.
[119]刘少波,林永森.美国资产证券化发展的新态势及其启示[J].南方金融,2000,3.
[120]刘少慧.我国资产证券化信托模式研究[J].企业技术开发,2006,25(011):95-98.
[121]刘玄.资产证券化的信贷扩张效应研究[J].上海金融,2010,8.
[122]刘中杰.基于金融危机的资产证券化再思考[J].经济研究导刊,2010(018):67-68.
[123]楼梦丹,陈婷,朱黎强.我国住房抵押贷款证券化产品定价模型[J].石家庄经济学院学报,2007,30(001):82-86.
[124]苗承雨,施祖留.住房抵押贷款证券化定价模式比较研究[J].学习与探索,2006(005):222-223.
[125]潘卢宏,苏丽萍.美国次贷危机对我国资产证券化的启示[J].福建金融管理干部学院学报, 2010:15-17.
[126]彭惠,李勇.不良资产证券化的收益分析与风险管理[J].国际金融研究,2004,6:35-37.
[127]彭惠,吴雪玲.资产证券化的分层动力—基于估值差异观点的改进[J].金融研究,2006,11(11).
[128]彭莉戈.我国资产证券化的现实障碍及对策[J].科技情报开发与经济,2006,16(012):117-118.
[129]祁小伟,宋群超.信贷资产证券化理论及中国的实践[J]. SCIENCE,2009,29(3).
[130]沈炳熙.资产证券化与金融改革[J].金融研究,2006,9(9).
[131]史晨昱.中国信贷资产证券化市场发展现状及展望[J].新金融,2009(004):45-49.
[132]舒乐.我国商业银行与资产证券化[J].科技和产业,2010,10(002):106-109.
[133]苏敬勤,宋华东,姜照华.基于前景理论的资产证券化投资模型及模拟分析[J]. JOURNAL OF DALIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY,2009,30(4).
[134]苏雪.我国资产证券化现状分析[J].河南工程学院学报:社会科学版,2009,24(003):35-38.
[135]屠敏恺.中国资产证券化结构性规范研究[J].理论月刊,2001(003):20-21.
[136]汪丛梅.我国资产证券化发展中的突出问题及其完善[J].金融理论与实践,2007(009):65-67.
[137]王峻.我国商业银行资产证券化的研究[J].武汉理工大学学报:信息与管理工程版,2006,28(002):114-118.
[138]王开国.关于中国推行资产证券化问题的思考[J].经济研究,1999(006):29-36.
[139]王明好,陈忠,李丽.考虑违约风险的固定利率抵押贷款支持证券三因素定价模型[J].上海交通大学学报,2006,40(004):628-631.
[140]王明好,陈忠,李丽.基于跳跃-扩散利率模型的浮动利率抵押贷款支持证券定价研究[J].管理工程学报,2007,21(001):77-82.
[141]王勇,孙文燕.资产证券化负外部性的经济学分析[J].济南金融,2003(005):11-12.
[142]王紫伟.美国资产证券化历史发展与品种介绍[J].国际金融研究,1998.
[143]魏世军.资产证券化制约因素及其对策[J].成都大学学报:社会科学版,2004(002):23-24.
[144]吴翔江.实施我国银行资产证券化的理性分析与现实选择[J].金融研究,2001(005):71-76.
[145]肖崎.资产证券化的宏观经济绩效:理论述评[J].金融理论与实践,2010(002):101-105.
[146]谢赤,谈文胜.住房抵押贷款支持证券定价方法研究[J].消费经济,2006,22(005):71-74.
[147]邢宏波,陈向东.美日资产证券化制度比较及借鉴[J].经济论坛,2004(008):117-118.
[148]熊凌.美国资产证券化的发展及中国的借鉴[J].国际经贸探索,2009,25(001):14-19.
[149]宣昌能,王信.金融创新与金融稳定:欧美资产证券化模式的比较分析[J].金融研究,2009,5:43.
[150]杨慧艳.利用资产证券化推动金融业的发展[J].中央财经大学学报,1999(012):42-46.
[151]杨艳玲.我国资产证券化中的风险问题研究[J].苏州市职业大学学报,2006,17:72-75.
[152]尹音频,阮兵.公平与效率:资产证券化的税收政策取向[J].财经科学,2007(006):39-44.
[153]于静.资产证券化对银行稳定性的影响研究[J].武汉理工大学学报:信息与管理工程版,2008,30(006):952-954.
[154]于庆伟.浅谈资产证券化的意义[J].山西财政税务专科学校学报,2003(06):63-64.
[155]曾志荣,张建文.住房抵押贷款证券化的风险和定价分析[J].经济论坛, 2006:114-116.
[156]张超英.资产证券化对货币政策实效性的影响[J].当代经济科学,2003(004):89-91.
[157]张超英.资产证券化对货币市场的影响[J].中国软科学,2005(002):57-65.
[158]张衢.国有商业银行不良资产证券化初探[J].金融研究,2002(006):104-110.
[159]张元良,温津伟.信用风险模型探究[J].中国金融电脑,2005(009):78-81.
[160]赵萌.资产证券化与金融危机:基于货币政策有效性的视角[J].上海金融,2010,10.
[161]赵胜来,陈俊芳.资产证券化原理,功能及模式研究[J].上海管理科学,2006,28:56-59.
[162]郑时正.我国资产证券化的理论研究述评[J].湖北社会科学,2005(006):94-95.
[163]周丹,王恩裕.资产证券化对我国货币政策的影响初探[J].金融理论与实践,2007:37-39.
[164]朱宝宪,刘炜莉.中国开展资产支撑证券化融资的研究[J].管理世界,1999(003):62-67.
[165]朱华培.资产证券化对美国货币政策信用传导渠道的影响[J].证券市场导报,2008(002):28-34.左正龙.美中资产证券化之比较研究[J].中国市场,2009(010):33-34.
[166] Cunningham D F, Hendershott P H. Pricing FHA mortgage default insurance[Z]. National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA,1986.
[167] Curley A J, Guttentag J M. The yield on insured residential mortgages[Z]. NBER,1974.
[168] Franke G, Krahnen J P. Default risk sharing between banks and markets: the contribution of collateralized debt obligations[Z]. University of Chicago Press,2007.
[169] Hendershott P H, Shilling J D. The impact of the agencies on conventional fixed-rate mortgage yields[Z]. National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA,1989.
[170] Marshall E R. A Primer on Securitization[Z]. JSTOR,1999.12,648-652.
[2] Jobst A A. The pricing puzzle: the default term structure of collateralised loan obligations[M]. CFS,2002.
[3] Kendall L T, Fishman M J. A primer on securitization[M]. the MIT press,2000.
[4]何小锋.资产证券化:中国的模式[M].北京大学出版社,2002.
[5]于凤坤.资产证券化:理论与实务[M].北京大学出版社,2002.
[6]张超英,翟祥辉.资产证券化:原理实务实例[M].经济科学出版社,1998.
[7] Chen Q. CDO Pricing and Copula Method[R]. working paper, University of Maryland,2006.
[8]杲永亮.资产证券化及其在我国的发展研究[D].上海:华东师范大学,2006.
[9]何应期.我国资产证券化的可行性分析[D].成都:四川大学,2005.
[10]侯及.资产证券化与我国金融结构革新[D].成都:四川大学,2007.
[11]刘红.我国资产证券化发展研究[D].合肥:安徽农业大学,2009.
[12]刘娟娟.资产证券化信息披露制度研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学,2010.
[13]吕川.资产证券化对金融体系的影响研究[D].武汉:华中科技大学,2006.
[14]王保岳.资产证券化风险研究[D].北京:中国社会科学院研究生院,2009.
[15]王心如.资产证券化与金融稳定的关联性研究[D].长春:吉林大学,2010.
[16]王志斌.货币政策、信贷政策、资产证券化、收入分配与次贷危机:一个文献综述[D].济南:山东大学,2010.
[17]张超英.资产证券化的本质和效应[D].上海:复旦大学,2004.
[18]张峰.资产证券化研究[D].北京:中共中央党校,2003.
[19]张洁.资产证券化及其风险研究[D].长春:吉林大学,2006.
[20] Albanese C, Chen O, Dalessandro A, et al. Dynamic credit correlation modeling[J]. preprint,2005.
[21] Albrecher H, Ladoucette S, Schoutens W. A generic one-factor Lévy model for pricing synthetic CDOs[J]. Advances in Mathematical Finance,2007:259-277.
[22] Ambrose B W, Buttimer R J, Capone C A. Pricing mortgage default and foreclosure delay[J]. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking,1997,29(3):314-325.
[23] Archer W R, Ling D C. Pricing Mortgage‐Backed Securities: Integrating Optimal Call and Empirical Models of Prepayment[J]. Real Estate Economics,1993,21(4):373-404.
[24] Baums T, Wymeersch E. Asset-backed securitization in Europe[J]. 1996.
[25] Benjamin J D, Heuson A J, Sirmans C F. The effect of origination strategies on the pricingof fixed-rate mortgage loans[J]. Journal of Housing Research,1995,6(1):137.
[26] Benston G J. The future of asset securitization: the benefits and costs of breaking up the bank[J]. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,1992,5(1):71-82.
[27] Black D G, Garbade K D, Silber W L. The impact of the GNMA pass-through program on FHA mortgage costs[J]. The Journal of Finance,1981,36(2):457-469.
[28] Boswell C. Migration Control in Europe After 9/11: Explaining the Absence of Securitization*[J]. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies,2007,45(3):589-610.
[29] Boudoukh J, Whitelaw R F, Richardson M, et al. Pricing mortgage-backed securities in a multifactor interest rate environment: A multivariate density estimation approach[J]. Review of Financial Studies,1997,10(2):405.
[30] Breeden D T. An intertemporal asset pricing model with stochastic consumption and investment opportunities[J]. Journal of Financial Economics,1979,7(3):265-296.
[31] Brennan M J, Schwartz E S. Determinants of GNMA mortgage prices[J]. Real Estate Economics,1985,13(3):209-228.
[32] Buonfino A. Between unity and plurality: the politicization and securitization of the discourse of immigration in Europe[J]. New Political Science,2004,26(1):23-49.
[33] Burtschell X, Gregory J, Laurent J P. A comparative analysis of CDO pricing models[J]. preprint,2005.
[34] Calem P S, Lacour-Little M. Risk-based capital requirements for mortgage loans[J]. Journal of Banking & Finance,2004,28(3):647-672.
[35] Chari V V, Jagannathan R. Adverse selection in a model of real estate lending[J]. The Journal of Finance,1989,44(2):499-508.
[36] Cumming C. The economics of securitization[J]. Quarterly Review,1987(Aut):11-23.
[37] Demarzo P, Duffie D. A liquidity‐ based model of security design[J]. Econometrica,1999,67(1):65-99.
[38] Deng Y, Quigley J M, Van Order R, et al. Mortgage default and low downpayment loans: the costs of public subsidy[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1996,26(3-4):263-285.
[39] Donahoo K, Shaffer S. Capital requirements and the securitization decision[J]. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Business,1991,31(4):12-24.
[40] Dunn K B, Mcconnell J J. A comparison of alternative models for pricing GNMA mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1981,36(2):471-484.
[41] Dunn K B, Mcconnell J J. Valuation of GNMA mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1981,36(3):599-616.
[42] Dunn K B, Singleton K J. An Empirical Analysis of the Pricing of Mortgage-Backed Securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1983,38(2):613-623.
[43] Dunn K B, Spatt C S. An analysis of mortgage contracting: Prepayment penalties and the due-on-sale clause[J]. The Journal of Finance,1985,40(1):293-308.
[44] Dunn K B, Spatt C S. Call options, points, and dominance restrictions on debt contracts[J].The Journal of Finance,1999,54(6):2317-2337.
[45] Eberlein E, Frey R, Hammerstein E A. Advanced credit portfolio modeling and CDO pricing[J]. Mathematics–Key Technology for the Future,2008:253-279.
[46] Epperson J F, Kau J B, Keenan D C, et al. Pricing default risk in mortgages[J]. Real Estate Economics,1985,13(3):261-272.
[47] Foster C, Order R. FHA terminations: A prelude to rational mortgage pricing[J]. Real Estate Economics, 1985,13(3):273-291.
[48] Frey R, Mcneil A J. Dependent defaults in models of portfolio credit risk[J]. Journal of Risk,2003,6:59-92.
[49] Frost C W. Asset Securitization and Corporate Risk Allocation[J]. Tul. L. Rev.,1997,72:101-2239.
[50] Hamilton D T, Gupton G, Berthault A. Default and recovery rates of corporate bond issuers: 2000[J]. Moody’s investors service,2001.
[51] Hamilton D, Varma P, Ou S, et al. Default and recovery rates of corporate bond issuers, 1920-2004[J]. Moodys Investors Services,2005.
[52] Hendershott P H, Van Order R. Integration of mortgage and capital markets and the accumulation of residential capital[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1989,19(2):189-210.
[53] Hess A C, Smith C W. Elements of mortgage securitization[J]. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics,1988,1(4):331-346.
[54] Hull J C. Options, futures, and derivatives[J]. Dynamical Systems and Statistical Mechanics, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,1997.
[55] Iacobucci E M, Winter R A. Asset securitization and asymmetric information[J]. J. Legal Stud.,2005,34:161-631.
[56] Ingersoll J. An examination of corporate call policies on convertible securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1977,32(2):463-478.
[57] Jarrow R A, Yu F. Counterparty risk and the pricing of defaultable securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,2001,56(5):1765-1799.
[58] Kalemanova A, Schmid B, Werner R. The normal inverse Gaussian distribution for synthetic CDO pricing[J]. Journal of Derivatives,2007,14(3):80.
[59] Kang P, Zenios S A. Complete prepayment models for mortgage-backed securities[J]. Management Science,1992,38(11):1665-1685.
[60] Kariya T, Kobayashi M. Pricing mortgage-backed securities (MBS)[J]. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets,2000,7(2):189-204.
[61] Kau J B, Keenan D C, Muller Iii W J, et al. A Generalized Valuation Model for Fixed-Rate Residential Mortgages.[J]. Journal of Money, Credit & Banking,1992,24(3).
[62] Kendall L T, Fishman M J. A Primer on Securitization[J]. Finance & Development,1997:52.
[63] Kolari J W, Fraser D R, Anari A. The effects of securitization on mortgage market yields: A cointegration analysis[J]. Real Estate Economics,1998,26(4):677-693.
[64] Lahny Iv P J. Asset Securitization: A Discussion of the Traditional Bankruptcy Attacks and an Analysis of the Next Potential Attack, Substantive Consolidation[J]. Am. Bankr. Inst. L. Rev.,2001,9:815.
[65] Li D X, Correlation O D. A Copula Function Approach[J]. Journal of Fixed Income,2000,9(4):43-54.
[66] Li D X, Liang M. CDO2 squared pricing using Gaussian mixture model with transformation of loss distribution[J]. Barclays Capital, Quantitative Analytics Global Credit Derivatives,2005.
[67] Liu B, Skully M. The determinants of mortgage yield spread differentials: Securitization[J]. Journal of Multinational Financial Management,2005,15(4-5):314-333.
[68] Loader I. Policing, securitization and democratization in Europe[J]. Criminology and Criminal Justice,2002,2(2):125.
[69] Lupica L R. Asset Securitization: The Unsecured Creditor's Perspective[J]. Tex. L. Rev.,1997,76:595.
[70] Meador M. The effects of mortgage laws on home mortgage rates[J]. Journal of Economics and Business,1982,34(2):143-148.
[71] Minton B, Opler T, Stanton S. Asset Securitization among industrial firms[J]. Unpublished paper, Ohio State University,1999.
[72] Naranjo A, Toevs A. The effects of purchases of mortgages and securitization by government sponsored enterprises on mortgage yield spreads and volatility[J]. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics,2002,25(2):173-195.
[73] Kane D, Schloegl L. Modelling credit: Theory and practice[J]. Lehman Brothers Analytical Research Series,2001.
[74] Peixoto F M. Valuation of a homogeneous collateralized debt obligation[J]. Masters in Mathematical Finance, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada,2004.
[75] Richard S F, Roll R. Prepayments on fixed-rate mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Portfolio Management,1989,15(3):73-82.
[76] Rosenthal J A, Ocampo J M. Analyzing the economic benefits of securitized credit[J]. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,1988,1(3):32-44.
[77] Rubinstein M. An aggregation theorem for securities markets* 1[J]. Journal of Financial Economics,1974,1(3):225-244.
[78] Sch Nbucher P J. Credit Derivatives Pricing Models: Models[J]. Pricing and Implementation, Jon Wiley and Sons, New York,2003.
[79] Schwarcz S L. Alchemy of Asset Securitization, The[J]. Stan. JL Bus. & Fin.,1994,1:133.
[80] Schwarcz S L. Global Alchemy of Asset Securitization, The[J]. Int'l Fin. L. Rev.,1995,14:30.
[81] Schwartz E S, Torous W N. Prepayment and the valuation of mortgage-backed securities[J]. The Journal of Finance,1989,44(2):375-392.
[82] Schwartz E S, Torous W N. Prepayment, default, and the valuation of mortgage pass-through securities[J]. The Journal of Business,1992,65(2):221-239.
[83] Schwartz E S, Torous W N. Prepayment, default, and the valuation of mortgage pass-through securities[J]. The Journal of Business,1992,65(2):221-239.
[84] Sirmans C F, Benjamin J D. Pricing fixed rate mortgages: Some empirical evidence[J]. Journal of Financial Services Research,1990,4(3):191-202.
[85] Stanton R. Rational prepayment and the valuation of mortgage-backed securities[J]. Review of Financial Studies,1995,8(3):677.
[86] Thurbull S M. An Empirical Analysis of the Pricing of Mortgage-Backed Securities: Discussion[J]. The Journal of Finance,1983,38(2):646-647.
[87]宾融.中美不良资产证券化的对比分析[J].财贸经济,2002(005):55-58.
[88]陈柏东.住房抵押贷款支撑证券定价方法研究[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2005(002):40-46.
[89]陈金霞.资产证券化的效应分析[J].南京财经大学学报,2005(005):59-61.
[90]陈凌白.后次贷危机时代我国资产证券化发展现状与展望[J].辽宁大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2010,38(005):133-137.
[91]陈裘逸,张保华.资产证券化定义和模式的检讨—以真实出售为中心[J].金融研究,2003:53-62.
[92]陈晓东.近年国内学术界关于资产证券化问题的研究综述——资产证券化问题研究之一[J].生产力研究,2004(002):189-191.
[93]陈颖,屠梅曾.国外住房抵押贷款支持证券定价理论的方法研究[J].中国房地产金融,2004:43-46.
[94]陈钊.美国住房抵押贷款证券化的现状:兼议我国推行住房抵押贷款证券化的可行性[J].金融研究,2000:129-134.
[95]程虎.关于我国资产证券化若干问题的探讨[J].国际贸易问题,2002,8(8).
[96]迟君辉.我国资产证券化发展的现状与风险防范分析[J].国际商务研究,2010(003):43-50.
[97]段炜,刘捷.试论资产证券化定义及其经济内涵[J].当代经济,2002,10.
[98]凡言.美国资产证券化的理论与实践[J].河南金融管理干部学院学报,2000(004):52-55.
[99]傅斌.我国银行资产证券化的关键环节及制度条件[J].金融研究,2000(004):80-88.
[100]何德旭.银行不良资产证券化:若干判断与分析[J].财贸经济,2000(008):34-43.
[101]何小峰,宋秀芳.对资产证券化税收制度安排的博弈论分析[J].经济科学,2001(006):21-26.
[102]何晓行.金融市场系统风险与资产证券化的相关性[J].财经科学,2010,4.
[103]何燕芳.金融危机背景下我国资产证券化风险控制问题探析[J]. JOURNAL OF SHANGQIU VOCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE,2009,8(6).
[104]贺显南,荆晶.日韩资产证券化发展及其启示[J].国际经贸探索,2008,24(008):41-45.
[105]姜新旺,黄劲松.CreditMetrics模型及其对我国商业银行的适用性[J].统计与决策, 2005:107-108.
[106]柯健.资产证券化的风险及其防范与化解[J].上海金融学院学报,2009(004):9-15.
[107]孔小伟.资产证券化与中国的金融发展[J].南方金融,2010(001):60-62.
[108]黎志成,艾毓斌.资产支持证券定价模型研究[J].武汉金融,2004(004):32-34.
[109]李大鹏,陈伟忠.基于无套利理论的MBS市场价值定价方法研究[J]. FINANCE TEACHING AND RESEARCH,2006.
[110]李稷文.我国资产证券化的实践,难点及政策建议[J].南昌工程学院学报,2007,26:97-101.
[111]李佳.资产证券化对金融市场流动性的影响[J].经济论坛,2010,12.
[112]李佳,王晓.资产证券化对金融稳定影响的研究评述[J].河南师范大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2010(001):129-132.
[113]李嘉焱,陶长高.资本市场,资产证券化与我国银行经营[J].国际融资,2006(011):32-34.
[114]李兴法,王庆石.基于CreditMetrics模型的商业银行信用风险应用研究[J].财经问题研究,2006(012):47-53.
[115]梁钧,胡南.资产证券化的收益和成本[J].上海金融,2000(003):35-37.
[116]梁志峰.资产证券化的金融创新理论研究综述[J].南华大学学报:社会科学版,2006,7(003):21-24.
[117]刘传哲,史国庆.住房抵押贷款支持证券定价模型的发展与启示[J].国际金融研究,2006:24-29.
[118]刘健.加拿大的资产证券化和市场观察[J].杭州金融研修学院学报,2004(10):58-59.
[119]刘少波,林永森.美国资产证券化发展的新态势及其启示[J].南方金融,2000,3.
[120]刘少慧.我国资产证券化信托模式研究[J].企业技术开发,2006,25(011):95-98.
[121]刘玄.资产证券化的信贷扩张效应研究[J].上海金融,2010,8.
[122]刘中杰.基于金融危机的资产证券化再思考[J].经济研究导刊,2010(018):67-68.
[123]楼梦丹,陈婷,朱黎强.我国住房抵押贷款证券化产品定价模型[J].石家庄经济学院学报,2007,30(001):82-86.
[124]苗承雨,施祖留.住房抵押贷款证券化定价模式比较研究[J].学习与探索,2006(005):222-223.
[125]潘卢宏,苏丽萍.美国次贷危机对我国资产证券化的启示[J].福建金融管理干部学院学报, 2010:15-17.
[126]彭惠,李勇.不良资产证券化的收益分析与风险管理[J].国际金融研究,2004,6:35-37.
[127]彭惠,吴雪玲.资产证券化的分层动力—基于估值差异观点的改进[J].金融研究,2006,11(11).
[128]彭莉戈.我国资产证券化的现实障碍及对策[J].科技情报开发与经济,2006,16(012):117-118.
[129]祁小伟,宋群超.信贷资产证券化理论及中国的实践[J]. SCIENCE,2009,29(3).
[130]沈炳熙.资产证券化与金融改革[J].金融研究,2006,9(9).
[131]史晨昱.中国信贷资产证券化市场发展现状及展望[J].新金融,2009(004):45-49.
[132]舒乐.我国商业银行与资产证券化[J].科技和产业,2010,10(002):106-109.
[133]苏敬勤,宋华东,姜照华.基于前景理论的资产证券化投资模型及模拟分析[J]. JOURNAL OF DALIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY,2009,30(4).
[134]苏雪.我国资产证券化现状分析[J].河南工程学院学报:社会科学版,2009,24(003):35-38.
[135]屠敏恺.中国资产证券化结构性规范研究[J].理论月刊,2001(003):20-21.
[136]汪丛梅.我国资产证券化发展中的突出问题及其完善[J].金融理论与实践,2007(009):65-67.
[137]王峻.我国商业银行资产证券化的研究[J].武汉理工大学学报:信息与管理工程版,2006,28(002):114-118.
[138]王开国.关于中国推行资产证券化问题的思考[J].经济研究,1999(006):29-36.
[139]王明好,陈忠,李丽.考虑违约风险的固定利率抵押贷款支持证券三因素定价模型[J].上海交通大学学报,2006,40(004):628-631.
[140]王明好,陈忠,李丽.基于跳跃-扩散利率模型的浮动利率抵押贷款支持证券定价研究[J].管理工程学报,2007,21(001):77-82.
[141]王勇,孙文燕.资产证券化负外部性的经济学分析[J].济南金融,2003(005):11-12.
[142]王紫伟.美国资产证券化历史发展与品种介绍[J].国际金融研究,1998.
[143]魏世军.资产证券化制约因素及其对策[J].成都大学学报:社会科学版,2004(002):23-24.
[144]吴翔江.实施我国银行资产证券化的理性分析与现实选择[J].金融研究,2001(005):71-76.
[145]肖崎.资产证券化的宏观经济绩效:理论述评[J].金融理论与实践,2010(002):101-105.
[146]谢赤,谈文胜.住房抵押贷款支持证券定价方法研究[J].消费经济,2006,22(005):71-74.
[147]邢宏波,陈向东.美日资产证券化制度比较及借鉴[J].经济论坛,2004(008):117-118.
[148]熊凌.美国资产证券化的发展及中国的借鉴[J].国际经贸探索,2009,25(001):14-19.
[149]宣昌能,王信.金融创新与金融稳定:欧美资产证券化模式的比较分析[J].金融研究,2009,5:43.
[150]杨慧艳.利用资产证券化推动金融业的发展[J].中央财经大学学报,1999(012):42-46.
[151]杨艳玲.我国资产证券化中的风险问题研究[J].苏州市职业大学学报,2006,17:72-75.
[152]尹音频,阮兵.公平与效率:资产证券化的税收政策取向[J].财经科学,2007(006):39-44.
[153]于静.资产证券化对银行稳定性的影响研究[J].武汉理工大学学报:信息与管理工程版,2008,30(006):952-954.
[154]于庆伟.浅谈资产证券化的意义[J].山西财政税务专科学校学报,2003(06):63-64.
[155]曾志荣,张建文.住房抵押贷款证券化的风险和定价分析[J].经济论坛, 2006:114-116.
[156]张超英.资产证券化对货币政策实效性的影响[J].当代经济科学,2003(004):89-91.
[157]张超英.资产证券化对货币市场的影响[J].中国软科学,2005(002):57-65.
[158]张衢.国有商业银行不良资产证券化初探[J].金融研究,2002(006):104-110.
[159]张元良,温津伟.信用风险模型探究[J].中国金融电脑,2005(009):78-81.
[160]赵萌.资产证券化与金融危机:基于货币政策有效性的视角[J].上海金融,2010,10.
[161]赵胜来,陈俊芳.资产证券化原理,功能及模式研究[J].上海管理科学,2006,28:56-59.
[162]郑时正.我国资产证券化的理论研究述评[J].湖北社会科学,2005(006):94-95.
[163]周丹,王恩裕.资产证券化对我国货币政策的影响初探[J].金融理论与实践,2007:37-39.
[164]朱宝宪,刘炜莉.中国开展资产支撑证券化融资的研究[J].管理世界,1999(003):62-67.
[165]朱华培.资产证券化对美国货币政策信用传导渠道的影响[J].证券市场导报,2008(002):28-34.左正龙.美中资产证券化之比较研究[J].中国市场,2009(010):33-34.
[166] Cunningham D F, Hendershott P H. Pricing FHA mortgage default insurance[Z]. National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA,1986.
[167] Curley A J, Guttentag J M. The yield on insured residential mortgages[Z]. NBER,1974.
[168] Franke G, Krahnen J P. Default risk sharing between banks and markets: the contribution of collateralized debt obligations[Z]. University of Chicago Press,2007.
[169] Hendershott P H, Shilling J D. The impact of the agencies on conventional fixed-rate mortgage yields[Z]. National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA,1989.
[170] Marshall E R. A Primer on Securitization[Z]. JSTOR,1999.12,648-652.