2012年以来，中国宏观经济形势发生了重大变化，经济由高速增长转变为中高速增长，经济发展进入“新常态”。在此过程中，衡量经济冷热程度的宏观价格指数也发生了显著的变化：一方面，自2012年3月到2016年8月，代表生产端价格的PPI同比增速连续54个月负增长，持续时间之久创历史之最；另一方面，代表消费端价格的CPI同比增速虽然一直为正，但增速逐渐放缓，呈通胀减速状况。可见，2012—2016年，中国出现了“PPI长时间持续负增长，而CPI增长率放缓但仍为正”的结构性通缩。如此长时间的结构性通缩会抑制企业投资和居民消费、加重企业债务负担从而加大金融系统的风险，不利于宏观经济健康平稳运行。因此，研究此轮结构通缩的原因和机制以及如何加以调控应对，对于结构性通缩的防治具有重要意义。

第一，本书从中国宏观经济的现实背景出发，探究了此轮结构性通缩的原因和形成机制。研究发现，多重机制非对称作用是2012—2016年中国结构性通缩形成的主要原因。其一，供求机制的非对称作用。长期以来，我国高端服务的供给相对需求不足以及低端工业品供给相对需求过剩的结构性失衡，造成了PPI与CPI走势的分化。其二，劳动力成本机制的非对称作用。劳动力成本上升对劳动和服务密集型的CPI影响力度大于对资金密集型的PPI影响力度，造成PPI和CPI走势分化。其三，国际大宗商品价格机制的非对称作用。国际大宗商品价格下降对资金密集型的PPI影响大于CPI，造成二者走势的分化。其四，“债务—通缩”机制的非对称作用。“债务—通缩”机制所形成的利息支出压力对资本密集的PPI影响显著大于对非资本密集的CPI影响，造成PPI与CPI走势分化。总而言之，上述四重机制的非对称作用使得我国在2012—2016年出现了PPI通缩而CPI通胀减速的状况。此外，上游PPI下跌向下游的传递也对CPI产生了一定的下拉作用，最终形成了PPI持续下跌和CPI温和上涨的局面，从而出现了结构性通货紧缩。

第二，从实证角度检验和证实了多重机制非对称作用下的结构性通缩理论。本书从多个角度、利用多种实证方法和多种数据来源对上述理论进行了实证检验，结果发现，该理论对中国结构性通缩具有很好的解释力。具体的实证检验方法如下：

其一，采用向量自回归（VAR）模型和因子分析相结合的方法，对我国2012—2016年结构性通缩的形成机制进行了实证检验。首先采用因子分析法将影响CPI与PPI变动的主要宏观经济变量共150个指标进行因子分析，抽取主成分因子，获得非对称影响CPI与PPI的多重机制。然后将CPI与PPI以及多重机制构建VAR模型，获得各机制对CPI与PPI的不同影响系数以及脉冲响应函数，验证了正是多重机制对CPI与PPI的非对称作用，造成了中国结构性通缩。

其二，采用MS-VAR模型，从CPI与PPI背离的角度分析了多重机制非对称作用对结构性通缩的影响。通过构建CPI与PPI背离指数，实证发现我国CPI与PPI的背离具有明显的两区制特征，各种因素与价格背离指数之间存在显著的非线性关系，进一步论证了多重机制对PPI与CPI的非对称作用对结构性通缩形成的影响。

其三，运用带有随机波动项的时变参数向量自回归模型（TVP-VARSV），研究了PPI与CPI之间的传导关系减弱对于结构性通缩的影响。研究发现，2012—2016年PPI与CPI之间的传导关系有减弱的趋势，这对CPI与PPI之间的背离以及结构性通缩起到了一定的作用。

第三，通过回顾通缩历史和总结通缩调控经验得失，为结构性通缩调控提供经验借鉴。为此，本书主要分析和总结了中国、美国和日本的通缩历程和调控经验。一方面，本书回顾分析了自1992年以来的中国历次通缩的发生背景、特征表现、形成原因、调控措施和调控效果，比较了中国历次通缩的异同以及调控经验和教训。另一方面，放眼国际的通缩历史，比较分析了20世纪以来美国和日本所经历的、具有代表性的通货紧缩历史阶段，并深入剖析历次通货紧缩的背景、原因，总结了其通缩调控的手段及效果，以期寻求防范和解决中国结构性通缩的基本思路和经验。

第四，在多重机制非对称作用的结构性通缩理论的基础上，结合历史上通缩调控的经验和教训，尝试建立了中国结构性通缩调控体系。中国结构性通缩调控体系不仅仅包括调控措施，还包括结构性通缩的判定标准、调控底线与目标、预警与预测、调控原则与方案措施，以及调控效果评价与建议等。可见，结构性通缩的调控体系是一个包括事前预测预警、事中调控原则与方案措施以及事后效果评价在内的、完整的有机整体，具有理论上的科学性、系统性以及程序上的可操作性，对结构性通缩的防治具有重要的理论和现实意义。

第五，本书对2012—2016年中国结构性通缩的调控经验和教训进行了总结。主要包括：其一，建立中国结构性通缩调控的体系需要坚持预防和调控并重。不仅需要关注通缩发生后的调控措施制定，还要重视通缩发生前的预防与事后的调控效果评价。其二，宏观经济政策需要同时兼顾需求侧与供给侧政策。通过双侧共同发力促进市场供需总量和供需结构恢复平衡，最终将经济增速和价格水平稳定在合理区间内。其三，应对结构性通缩需要采取区间调控。在我国经济增速明显放缓，价格运行中枢和波动区间整体下移，且价格的结构性变化明显的情况下，需要提升对通缩的容忍度，反通缩调控应该从单一的点目标调控转向区间调控。

值得注意的是，近段时间以来中国结构性通缩再次显现：一方面，2019年以来，中国的PPI同比增速持续低迷，并在2019年7月和8月出现负增长，通缩风险加剧；另一方面，2019年3月以来，CPI同比增速保持在2%以上，而1—8月CPI非食品价格同比增速为1.5%。可见，2019年7月以来，中国再次面临结构性通缩的压力。因此，本书建议在结构性通缩调控体系下，积极地预防和调控可能再次出现的结构性通缩。

关键词：通货紧缩；结构性；调控体系；多重机制；非对称作用

Since 2012, China's macroeconomic situation has undergone major changes, with the economy changing from high-speed growth to medium-high-speed growth, and economic development entering a "new normal". In this process, the macro price index, which measures the degree of economic heat and cold, has also undergone significant changes: on the one hand, from March 2012 to August 2016, the year-on-year growth rate of PPI, which represents the price of the production side, has been negative for 54 consecutive months, lasting the longest time in history; On the other hand, although the year-on-year growth rate of CPI, which represents consumer-side prices, has been positive, the growth rate has gradually slowed down, showing a deceleration of inflation. It can be seen that from 2012 to 2016, China experienced structural deflation in which "PPI growth continued to be negative for a long time, while CPI growth slowed down but was still positive". Such a long period of structural deflation will inhibit corporate investment and household consumption, increase corporate debt burden, and thus increase the risk of the financial system, which is not conducive to the healthy and stable operation of the macroeconomy. Therefore, studying the causes and mechanisms of this round of structural deflation and how to regulate and deal with it is of great significance for the prevention and treatment of structural deflation. First, starting from the actual background of China's macroeconomy, this book explores the causes and formation mechanisms of this round of structural deflation. It is found that the asymmetric effect of multiple mechanisms is the main reason for the formation of structural deflation in China from 2012 to 2016. First, the asymmetric effect of the supply and demand mechanism. For a long time, the structural imbalance between the relative demand for the supply of high-end services in China and the excess demand for the supply of low-end industrial products has caused the divergence of PPI and CPI. Second, the asymmetric effect of the labor cost mechanism. The impact of rising labor costs on labor- and service-intensive CPI is greater than on capital-intensive PPI, resulting in the divergence of PPI and CPI. Third, the asymmetric role of the international commodity price mechanism. The decline in international commodity prices has a greater impact on the capital-intensive PPI than the CPI, resulting in a divergence between the two trends. Fourth, the asymmetric role of the "debt-deflation" mechanism. The interest expense pressure formed by the "debt-deflation" mechanism has a significantly greater impact on capital-intensive PPI than on non-capital-intensive CPI, resulting in the divergence of PPI and CPI. All in all, the asymmetric effect of the above four-fold mechanism led to PPI deflation and CPI inflation deceleration in China from 2012 to 2016. In addition, the transmission of the upstream PPI decline to the downstream also has a certain downward effect on the CPI, and eventually forms a situation of continuous decline in PPI and moderate rise in CPI, resulting in structural deflation. Second, from an empirical perspective, the theory of structural deflation under the asymmetry of multiple mechanisms is tested and confirmed. This book empirically tests the above theory from multiple angles, using a variety of empirical methods and multiple data sources, and finds that the theory has a good explanatory power for China's structural deflation. The specific empirical test methods are as follows: First, the combination of vector autoregression (VAR) model and factor analysis is used to empirically test the formation mechanism of structural deflation in China from 2012 to 2016. Firstly, the factor analysis method was used to factor analyze a total of 150 indicators of the main macroeconomic variables affecting the change of CPI and PPI, and the principal component factors were extracted to obtain multiple mechanisms of asymmetric influence on CPI and PPI. Then, the VAR model of CPI and PPI and multiple mechanisms is constructed, and the different influence coefficients and impulse response functions of each mechanism on CPI and PPI are obtained, which verifies that it is the asymmetric effect of multiple mechanisms on CPI and PPI that causes structural deflation in China. Second, using the MS-VAR model, the impact of multiple mechanism asymmetry on structural deflation is analyzed from the perspective of CPI and PPI divergence. By constructing the CPI and PPI divergence index, it is empirically found that the divergence between CPI and PPI in China has obvious two-zone characteristics, and there is a significant nonlinear relationship between various factors and the price divergence index, which further demonstrates the impact of multiple mechanisms on the asymmetric effect of PPI and CPI on the formation of structural deflation. Third, the time-varying parameter vector autoregressive model (TVP-VARSV) with random fluctuation terms was used to study the effect of the weakening of the conduction relationship between PPI and CPI on structural deflation. It is found that the transmission relationship between PPI and CPI tends to weaken from 2012 to 2016, which plays a role in the divergence between CPI and PPI and structural deflation. Third, by reviewing the history of deflation and summarizing the gains and losses of deflation regulation and control, it provides experience for structural deflationary regulation. To this end, this book mainly analyzes and summarizes the deflationary process and regulatory experience in China, the United States and Japan. On the one hand, this book reviews and analyzes the background, characteristics, causes, regulatory measures and regulatory effects of China's deflation since 1992, and compares the similarities and differences of China's deflation, as well as regulatory experience and lessons. On the other hand, looking at the international history of deflation, this paper compares and analyzes the representative historical stages of deflation experienced by the United States and Japan since the 20th century, and deeply analyzes the background and causes of previous deflation, and summarizes the means and effects of deflationary regulation, in order to seek the basic ideas and experience of preventing and solving China's structural deflation. Fourth, on the basis of the structural deflation theory of multiple mechanisms asymmetric, combined with the experience and lessons of historical deflationary regulation, we try to establish China's structural deflationary regulation and control system. China's structural deflation regulation and control system includes not only regulatory measures, but also the judgment criteria for structural deflation, the bottom line and goals of regulation, early warning and prediction, regulatory principles and program measures, and evaluation and suggestions for regulatory effects. It can be seen that the regulation and control system of structural deflation is a complete organic whole, including advance prediction and early warning, in-process regulation principles and program measures, and post-effect evaluation, which is theoretically scientific, systematic and procedurally operable, and has important theoretical and practical significance for the prevention and treatment of structural deflation. Fifth, this book summarizes the experience and lessons learned from the regulation of structural deflation in China from 2012 to 2016. It mainly includes: First, the establishment of China's structural deflationary regulation system needs to adhere to both prevention and regulation. It is necessary to pay attention not only to the formulation of regulatory measures after the occurrence of deflation, but also to the prevention before the occurrence of deflation and the evaluation of the regulatory effect after the fact. Second, macroeconomic policies need to take into account both demand-side and supply-side policies. Through bilateral joint efforts, the total supply and demand of the market and the structure of supply and demand will be rebalanced, and the economic growth rate and price level will be stabilized within a reasonable range. Third, to deal with structural deflation, it is necessary to adopt range regulation. In the case of China's economic growth slowing down significantly, the overall downward movement of the price operation center and volatility range, and the structural changes in prices are obvious, it is necessary to improve the tolerance for deflation, and anti-deflation regulation should shift from a single point target regulation to range regulation. It is worth noting that China's structural deflation has once again appeared in recent times: on the one hand, since 2019, China's PPI growth rate has continued to be sluggish, and in July and August 2019, there was negative growth, and the risk of deflation intensified; On the other hand, since March 2019, the year-on-year growth rate of CPI has remained above 2%, while the year-on-year growth rate of CPI non-food prices from January to August was 1.5%. It can be seen that since July 2019, China has once again faced the pressure of structural deflation. Therefore, this book recommends actively preventing and regulating structural deflation that may reoccur under the structural deflationary regulatory system. Keywords: deflation; Structural; regulatory system; multiple mechanisms; Asymmetric action（AI翻译）