汤铎铎

习近平总书记在“5·17”讲话中指出，历史表明，社会大变革的时代，一定是哲学社会科学大发展的时代。当代中国正经历着我国历史上最为广泛而深刻的社会变革，也正在进行着人类历史上最为宏大而独特的实践创新。这种前无古人的伟大实践，必将给理论创造、学术繁荣提供强大动力和广阔空间。在中华人民共和国成立70年，改革开放40年，我国经济发展步入新阶段之际，我国的经济学研究者要呼应和落实习主席的讲话精神，致力于构建有中国特色的经济学理论框架和体系。就宏观经济学学科而言，目前应该立足于两个基础。一方面，需要紧跟国际学术潮流，尤其需要关注本轮国际金融危机后宏观经济学的最新发展；另一方面，需要在研究中突出中国元素的主体地位，致力于解释中国事实，解决中国问题，服务中国利益，传播中国经验。

从凯恩斯的《就业、利息与货币通论》算起，现代宏观经济学已经有80年的历史。从大萧条到大衰退，纵观整个宏观经济学发展史，西方发达国家的实践无疑占据主体地位。虽然研究方法和工具具有通用性和普遍性，但是其所基于的事实主要是发达国家的事实，其所解决的问题主要是发达国家的问题，其所服务的利益也主要是发达国家的利益。随着我国经济体量不断增大，融入全球经济的程度不断加深，中国问题和中国经验受到越来越多的关注，中国利益有了越来越广泛的存在，中国也越来越多地被要求发表话语、阐明立场。2007—2009年的国际金融和经济危机，引发全球经济的剧烈震荡和深刻调整，也对宏观经济研究提出了新的要求。宏观经济学正在经历深刻变革，中国元素在这一进程中扮演何种角色，而这一角色又该如何进一步服务于中国的经济现实，无疑是需要深入研究和思考的问题。

目前来看，国际经济危机对宏观经济理论研究的影响主要体现在对金融部门的处理。正如Blanchard（2017）所言，2007—2009年的国际经济危机，是宏观经济学专业知识的一次失败。除了少数经济学家之外，几乎整个宏观经济学界都忽视了金融体系和金融机构。虽然公司金融和行为经济学在相关领域有所建树，但是这些成果并未被整合到主流宏观经济模型中去。这导致危机后宏观经济学的工具价值备受质疑，而很多经济学家也开始着手修补甚至重构。除了在模型中更加细致地刻画金融部门，宏观经济学家也开始系统地关注信贷、流动性、杠杆率、资产泡沫和金融危机等问题。比如，Adrian和Shin（2010）提出了一个对流动性的理解：流动性总量可以看作金融部门资产负债表的变化率，金融部门的杠杆率是顺周期的，而这会放大金融风险。Schularick和Taylor（2012）研究了14个国家100多年的货币、信贷和其他宏观经济指标，发现信贷增长往往会导致金融危机，而政策制定者总是忽视信贷总量而自食其果。Brunnermeier和Sannikov（2014）指出，经济的内在杠杆率决定了其发生金融危机的概率，资产证券化和金融衍生品会导致更高的杠杆率和更频繁的危机。Kumhof等（2015）研究了收入分配会如何影响居民杠杆率甚至引发金融危机，发现大萧条和大衰退前都有一个现象，即高收入家庭收入份额大幅上升，而中低收入家庭则杠杆率大幅上升。

在理论界关注金融部门的同时，相关机构和职能部门也开始研究如何完善和改进金融账户统计。经济学家和政策制定者都发现，就金融风险的甄别和防范而言，详尽而周全的金融账户数据必不可少。于是，国际货币基金组织（IMF）和国际清算银行（BIS）等国际金融机构，美联储和欧洲央行等中央银行，以及各国的相关部门和职能机构，都开始致力于推动金融账户统计的发展和完善。比如，Hulten等（2015）收录了2010年11月召开的美联储相关会议的论文，主题是研究为何大家对如此规模的金融危机的来临视而不见，以及未来如何在数据和度量方面进行改进。Winkler等（2014）收录了2011年11月召开的欧洲央行相关会议的论文，主题是资金流量表视角下的金融危机。美国经济分析局（Bureau of Economic Analysis，BEA）和美联储正在联合推进的综合宏观账户（Integrated Macroeconomic Accounts）（Yamashita，2013），目前也已经取得了较大进展。

除了对金融部门和金融账户统计的特别关注外，还有两个方向值得一提。一是对全球金融周期和国际资本论流动的研究（Rey，2015；2016；Miranda-Agrippino & Rey，2015）；二是对收入和财富分配问题的研究（Piketty & Zucman，2014；Kumhof et al.，2015）。所有这些方向并不是独立的和割裂的，而是相互联系并且有相似的数据基础。首先，这些研究都深受本轮国际金融和经济危机的影响，可以视为从不同角度对金融和实体经济关系的再思考；其次，这些研究有相同的视角，除了Borio（2014）提出的金融视角、开放视角和中期视角之外，还可以加上重视资产、负债和财富的存量视角；最后，这些研究都非常依赖金融账户数据，统计部门开始完善和改进数据，有些研究还致力于挖掘更长时段的金融账户数据，刻画更长时段的经济和金融现象，得到了有说服力的结论，令人耳目一新。

强调我国宏观经济研究要紧跟国际学术前沿，并不是刻意地盲目追随，而是由我国当下的经济现实决定的。一方面，全球经济和金融一体化已经空前深入，我国经济也已经全面融入全球经济；另一方面，厘清金融和实体经济的关系也是破解我国当前经济难局的关键所在。我国的金融改革和发展与我国的实体经济周期休戚相关，我国政府也一贯重视金融发展和金融风险，很早就认识到金融在现代经济中的核心地位。本轮国际金融危机后，我国政府维护金融稳定的决心更加坚定，而我国经济面临的各种矛盾和难题也都是金融问题。比如，货币总量和实体经济的关系问题、资金脱实向虚的问题、资产价格暴涨暴跌的问题、国际资本进出和汇率稳定问题、企业融资难融资贵的问题、“钱荒”和“资产荒”交替出现的问题，等等。

总之，利用当前国际前沿的宏观经济学理论和方法，借鉴西方发达国家经济和金融发展数百年的经验，来解释我国当前的经济现象，处理我国当前的经济问题，是本轮国际金融危机后我国宏观经济研究发展的正途。具体而言，在内容上要把金融和开放置于核心地位，在数据上要高度重视并且深入挖掘金融账户数据，在方法上要积极学习和吸收国际前沿方法，甚至去开创新的研究方法。当前的主流宏观经济学用效用函数刻画居民，用生产函数刻画企业。金融账户方法则提供了另一个视角，即所有经济主体和经济部门，首先都可以视为一张资产负债表，可以从流量和存量两个角度去考察其行为。目前，我国学界在这方面已经有了一些可喜的进展，比如李扬等（2012，2013，2015，2018）的国家资产负债表研究。未来，立足于金融账户数据，用相关方法分析我国的经济周期波动，是非常有前景的研究方向。在这个方向下有很多紧迫的工作需要展开，比如，全面综述后危机时代的宏观经济学，总结我国金融周期的特征事实，探讨全球金融周期下的中国宏观经济，分析我国的财富总量与财富分配，以及在这些研究的基础上评价我国的宏观调控政策，等等。习近平总书记在“5·17”讲话中强调，“这是一个需要理论而且一定能够产生理论的时代，这是一个需要思想而且一定能够产生思想的时代。”我辈学人应该担负起时代的责任，努力在各自的学科领域做出应有的贡献。

参考文献

李扬、张晓晶、常欣、汤铎铎、李成：《中国主权资产负债表及其风险评估》（上、下），《经济研究》2012年第6、7期。

李扬、张晓晶、常欣等：《中国国家资产负债表2013——理论、方法与风险评估》，中国社会科学出版社2013年版。

李扬、张晓晶、常欣等：《中国国家资产负债表2015——杠杆调整与风险管理》，中国社会科学出版社2015年版。

李扬、张晓晶、常欣等：《中国国家资产负债表2018》，中国社会科学出版社2018年版。

Adrian，Tobias，and Hyun Song Shin，“Liquidity and leverage”，Journal of Financial Intermediation，Vol. 19，No. 3，2010，pp. 418-437.

Blanchard，Olivier，Macroeconomics（7e），Boston：Pearson，2017.

Borio Claudio，“The financial cycle and macroeconomics：What have we learnt？”，Journal of Banking & Finance，Vol. 45，2014，pp.182-198.

Brunnermeier，Markus K.，and Yuliy Sannikov，“A Macroeconomic Model with a Financial Sector”，American Economic Review，Vol. 104（2），2014，pp. 379-421.

Hulten，Charles R.，and Marshall B. Reinsdorf（Eds.），Measuring Wealth and Financial Intermediation and Their Links to the Real Economy，University of Chicago Press，2015，

Kumhof，Michael，Romain Rancière，and Pablo Winant，“Inequality，Leverage，and Crises”，American Economic Review，Vol. 105（3），2015，pp. 1217-1245.

Miranda-Agrippino，Silvia and Hélène Rey，“World Asset Markets and the Global Financial Cycle”，NBER Working Papers 21722，2015.

Piketty，Thomas，and Gabriel Zucman，“Capital is Back：Wealth-Income Ratios in Rich Countries，1700-2010”，Quarterly Journal of Economics，Vol. 129（3），2014，pp. 1255-310.

Rey，Hélène，“Dilemma not Trilemma：The global Financial Cycle and Monetary Policy Independence”，NBER Working Papers 21162，2015.

Rey，Hélène，“International Channels of Transmission of Monetary Policy and the Mundellian Trilemma”，NBER Working Papers 21852，2016.

Schularick，Moritz and Alan M. Taylor，“Credit Booms Gone Bust：Monetary Policy，Leverage Cycles，and Financial Crises，1870-2008”，American Economic Review，Vol.102（2），2012，pp. 1029-1261.

Winkler，Bernhard，Ad van Riet，and Peter Bull（eds），A Flow-of-Funds Perspective on the Financial Crisis，Volume I：Money，Credit and Sectoral Balance Sheets，and Volume II：Macroeconomic Imbalances and Risks to Financial Stability，Palgrave Macmillan，2014.

Yamashita，Takashi，“A Guide to the Integrated Macroeconomic Accounts”，BEA Briefing，April，2013.

General Secretary Tangduo Xi Jinping pointed out in his "May 17" speech that history shows that the era of great social change must be an era of great development of philosophy and social sciences. Contemporary China is experiencing the most extensive and profound social changes in China's history, and is also carrying out the most grand and unique practical innovation in human history. This unprecedented great practice will surely provide a strong impetus and broad space for theoretical creation and academic prosperity. In the 70 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China, 40 years since the reform and opening up, and China's economic development has entered a new stage, China's economic researchers should echo the spirit of the speech of the chairman and strive to build an economic theoretical framework and system with Chinese characteristics. As far as the discipline of macroeconomics is concerned, it should now be based on two foundations. On the one hand, it is necessary to keep up with the international academic trend, especially the latest development of macroeconomics after the current round of international financial crisis. On the other hand, it is necessary to highlight the main position of Chinese elements in research, and strive to explain Chinese facts, solve Chinese problems, serve Chinese interests, and disseminate Chinese experience. Modern macroeconomics has been around for 80 years, starting with Keynes's General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. From the Great Depression to the Great Recession, throughout the history of macroeconomics, the practice of Western developed countries undoubtedly occupies the dominant position. Although the research methods and tools are universal and universal, they are based on facts mainly developed countries, the problems it solves are mainly developed countries, and the interests it serves are mainly the interests of developed countries. With the continuous increase of China's economy and the deepening of its integration into the global economy, China's issues and Chinese experience have received more and more attention, China's interests have become more and more extensive, and China has been increasingly required to speak and clarify its position. The international financial and economic crisis of 2007-2009 triggered severe shocks and profound adjustments in the global economy, and also put forward new requirements for macroeconomic research. Macroeconomics is undergoing profound changes, and what role Chinese elements play in this process, and how this role should further serve China's economic reality, is undoubtedly a question that requires in-depth study and consideration. At present, the impact of the international economic crisis on macroeconomic theory research is mainly reflected in the treatment of the financial sector. As Blanchard (2017) argues, the international economic crisis of 2007-2009 was a failure of macroeconomic expertise. With the exception of a few economists, almost the entire macroeconomics community ignores the financial system and financial institutions. While corporate finance and behavioral economics have made significant contributions in these fields, these results have not been integrated into mainstream macroeconomic models. This has called into question the value of the tools of post-crisis macroeconomics, and many economists have begun to tinker with or even restructure. In addition to characterizing the financial sector in greater detail in models, macroeconomists are also systematically focusing on issues such as credit, liquidity, leverage, asset bubbles, and financial crises. For example, Adrian and Shin (2010) propose an understanding of liquidity: total liquidity can be seen as the rate of change in the balance sheet of the financial sector, and the leverage ratio of the financial sector is pro-cyclical, which amplifies financial risk. Schularick and Taylor (2012) studied monetary, credit, and other macroeconomic indicators in 14 countries for more than 100 years and found that credit growth often leads to financial crises, while policymakers tend to ignore the total amount of credit and suffer the consequences. Brunnermeier and Sannikov (2014) point out that the intrinsic leverage ratio of an economy determines its probability of a financial crisis, and that asset securitization and financial derivatives lead to higher leverage and more frequent crises. Kumhof et al. (2015) studied how income distribution affects household leverage and even triggers financial crises, and found that there was a phenomenon before the Great Depression and Great Recession, that is, the income share of high-income households rose sharply, while the leverage ratio of low- and middle-income households rose sharply. While the theoretical community is concerned about the financial sector, relevant institutions and functional departments have also begun to study how to improve and improve financial account statistics. Economists and policymakers alike have found that detailed and comprehensive financial account data are essential for identifying and preventing financial risks. As a result, international financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), central banks such as the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank, as well as relevant departments and functional institutions in various countries, have begun to promote the development and improvement of financial account statistics. For example, Hulten et al. (2015) included papers from a November 2010 Fed meeting on why a financial crisis of this magnitude was turned blind and how future improvements in data and measurement could be made. Winkler et al. (2014) included papers from the November 2011 ECB meeting on the financial crisis from the perspective of the flow statement. The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) and the Federal Reserve, which are jointly promoting Integrated Macroeconomic Accounts (Yamashita, 2013), have also made great progress. In addition to the special attention paid to the financial sector and financial account statistics, two directions are worth mentioning. The first is a study of the global financial cycle and the flow of international capital (Rey, 2015; 2016; Miranda-Agrippino & Rey，2015）； The second is the study of income and wealth distribution (Piketty & Zucman, 2014; Kumhof et al., 2015). All these directions are not independent and fragmented, but are interconnected and have similar data bases. First of all, these studies are deeply affected by the current round of international financial and economic crisis, and can be regarded as a rethinking of the relationship between finance and the real economy from different perspectives. Second, these studies have the same perspective, in addition to the financial, open and medium-term perspectives proposed by Borio (2014), which can also add the stock perspective that values assets, liabilities and wealth; Finally, these studies relied heavily on financial account data, and statistical offices began to refine and improve the data, and some studies also focused on mining financial account data over longer periods of time to characterize economic and financial phenomena over longer periods, and came to convincing conclusions. It is emphasized that China's macroeconomic research should closely follow the international academic frontier, not deliberately blindly followed, but determined by China's current economic reality. On the one hand, global economic and financial integration has been unprecedentedly deepened, and China's economy has also been fully integrated into the global economy; On the other hand, clarifying the relationship between finance and the real economy is also the key to solving China's current economic difficulties. China's financial reform and development is closely related to China's real economic cycle, and the Chinese government has always attached importance to financial development and financial risks, and has long recognized the core position of finance in the modern economy. After the current round of international financial crisis, the Chinese government's determination to maintain financial stability has become firmer, and the various contradictions and problems facing our economy are also financial problems. For example, the problem of the relationship between the total amount of money and the real economy, the problem of funds turning from real to virtual, the problem of sharp rise and fall of asset prices, the problem of international capital entry and exit and exchange rate stability, the problem of difficult and expensive financing for enterprises, the problem of "money shortage" and "asset shortage" alternately, and so on. In short, using the current international frontier macroeconomic theories and methods, drawing on the experience of economic and financial development of Western developed countries for hundreds of years, to explain China's current economic phenomena and deal with China's current economic problems, is the right way for China's macroeconomic research and development after the current round of international financial crisis. Specifically, in terms of content, we should put finance and openness at the core, attach great importance to and dig deep into financial account data, actively learn and absorb international cutting-edge methods in terms of methods, and even create new research methods. The current mainstream macroeconomics uses utility functions to characterize residents and production functions to characterize enterprises. The financial account approach provides another perspective, that is, all economic agents and economic sectors can first be regarded as a balance sheet, and their behavior can be examined from both the perspective of flow and stock. At present, China's academic circles have made some gratifying progress in this regard, such as Li Yang et al. (2012, 2013, 2015, 2018) national balance sheet research. In the future, based on financial account data, using relevant methods to analyze China's economic cycle fluctuations is a very promising research direction. There is a lot of urgent work to be carried out in this direction, such as a comprehensive overview of macroeconomics in the post-crisis era, summarizing the characteristic facts of China's financial cycle, discussing China's macroeconomy under the global financial cycle, analyzing China's total wealth and wealth distribution, and evaluating China's macro-control policies on the basis of these studies, and so on. In his May 17 speech, General Secretary Xi Jinping stressed that "this is an era that needs theories and can certainly produce theories, and this is an era that needs ideas and must be able to produce ideas." "Scholars of our generation should shoulder the responsibilities of the times and strive to make due contributions in their respective disciplines. References Li Yang, Zhang Xiaojing, Chang Xin, Tang Duoduo, Li Cheng, "China's Sovereign Balance Sheet and Its Risk Assessment", Economic Research Journal, No. 6 and 7, 2012. Li Yang, Zhang Xiaojing, Chang Xin, et al., China's National Balance Sheet 2013 – Theory, Methods and Risk Assessment, China Social Sciences Press, 2013. Li Yang, Zhang Xiaojing, Chang Xin, et al., China's National Balance Sheet 2015 – Leverage Adjustment and Risk Management, China Social Sciences Press, 2015. Li Yang, Zhang Xiaojing, Chang Xin, et al., China's National Balance Sheet 2018, China Social Sciences Press, 2018. Adrian，Tobias，and Hyun Song Shin，“Liquidity and leverage”，Journal of Financial Intermediation，Vol. 19，No. 3，2010，pp. 418-437.Blanchard，Olivier，Macroeconomics（7e），Boston：Pearson，2017.Borio Claudio，“The financial cycle and macroeconomics：What have we learnt？ ”，Journal of Banking & Finance，Vol. 45，2014，pp.182-198.Brunnermeier，Markus K.，and Yuliy Sannikov，“A Macroeconomic Model with a Financial Sector”，American Economic Review，Vol. 104（2）， 2014，pp. 379-421.Hulten，Charles R.，and Marshall B. Reinsdorf（Eds.），Measuring Wealth and Financial Intermediation and Their Links to the Real Economy，University of Chicago Press， 2015，Kumhof，Michael，Romain Rancière，and Pablo Winant，“Inequality，Leverage，and Crises”，American Economic Review，Vol. 105（3），2015，pp. 1217-1245.Miranda-Agrippino，Silvia and Hélène Rey，“World Asset Markets and the Global Financial Cycle”，NBER Working Papers 21722，2015. Piketty，Thomas，and Gabriel Zucman，“Capital is Back：Wealth-Income Ratios in Rich Countries，1700-2010”，Quarterly Journal of Economics，Vol. 129（3），2014，pp. 1255-310.Rey，Hélène，“Dilemma not Trilemma：The global Financial Cycle and Monetary Policy Independence”，NBER Working Papers 21162，2015. Rey，Hélène，“International Channels of Transmission of Monetary Policy and the Mundellian Trilemma”，NBER Working Papers 21852，2016. Schularick，Moritz and Alan M. Taylor，“Credit Booms Gone Bust：Monetary Policy，Leverage Cycles，and Financial Crises，1870-2008”，American Economic Review，Vol.102（2），2012，pp. 1029-1261.Winkler，Bernhard，Ad van Riet，and Peter Bull（eds），A Flow-of-Funds Perspective on the Financial Crisis，Volume I：Money，Credit and Sectoral Balance Sheets，and Volume II：Macroeconomic Imbalances and Risks to Financial Stability，Palgrave Macmillan，2014.Yamashita，Takashi，“A Guide to the Integrated Macroeconomic Accounts”，BEA Briefing，April，2013.（AI翻译）