國(guó)貿(mào)外文翻譯--不同資本主義體制下的反周期性預(yù)算政策比較（節(jié)選）

1、<p>　　700單詞，4000英文字符,1400漢字</p><p>　　出處：Amable B, Azizi K. Counter-cyclical budget policy across varieties of capitalism ☆[J]. Structural Change & Economic Dynamics, 2014, 30:1-9.</p><p&g

2、t;　　Counter-cyclical budget policy across varieties of capitalism</p><p>　　Bruno Amable, Karim Azizi</p><p><b>　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　The role of macroeconomic policy i

3、n the different varieties of capitalism has been largely ignored. Recent contributions to the literature have argued that nonliberal economies, i.e. coordinated market economies, should be expected to have less accommoda

4、ting (i.e. less counter-cyclical) macroeconomic policies than liberal varieties. Using time-series cross-section data on 18 OECD countries between 1980 and 2009, this paper tests that hypothesis and, more particularly, w

5、hether the reaction of dis</p><p>　　Keywords: Varieties of capitalism ;Macroeconomic policy ;Fiscal policy</p><p>　　Macroeconomic policy and varieties of capitalism</p><p>　　Assessi

6、ng the counter-cyclicality of macroeconomic policy</p><p>　　In order to assess whether ?scal policies are pro- or counter-cyclical, one usually relates some indicator of ?scal policy, e.g. the budget balance

7、, to a measure of economic shock. A positive association means that a recession, for instance, leads to a decrease in the budget surplus or an increase in the budget de?cit. In this case, ?scal policy is said to be count

8、er-cyclical since the evolution of the bud- get balance will act in an expansionary way. By contrast, if the correlation between the </p><p>　　acts in a pro-cyclical way. A recession will then lead to a tigh

9、ter budget balance, which will reinforce the initial effect of the negative shock. To sum up, a counter-cyclical policy is expansionary in bad times and contractionary in good times. A pro-cyclical policy is exactly the

10、opposite.</p><p>　　Varieties of macroeconomic policy</p><p>　　The varieties of capitalism (VoC) literature (Hall and Soskice, 2001) differentiates developed economies according to a certain numb

11、er of institutional characteristics: industrial relations, education and vocational training, corporate governance, inter-?rm relations and intra-?rm coordination. It distinguishes mostly two types of capitalism, liberal

12、 market economies (LMEs) and coordinated market economies (CMEs), which differ not only in their institutional features but also in certain macroeco</p><p>　　This literature has mainly focused on long-term,

13、slowly-changing institutional differences between the two archetypal varieties and has paid relatively little attention to short-term policies (Amable, 2009). Would LMEs and CMEs be clearly distinguishable in terms of ma

14、croeconomic policy, either budgetary or monetary? In recent contributions, Soskice (2007), Carlin and Soskice (2009) and Iversen and Soskice (2010) have presented some theoretical and empirical elements in favour of a cl

15、ear differe</p><p>　　Conclusion</p><p>　　This paper has investigated the relationship between macroeconomic shocks and discretionary ?scal policies by distinguishing the type of capitalism which

16、 characterises countries. Indeed, it has recently been proposed in the VoC literature that liberal market economies would be expected to follow accommodating macroeco- nomic policies, whereas nonliberal varieties would a

17、dopt a more conservative stance. Using the standard distinction between LMES and CMEs, as well as taking account of the existen</p><p>　　Our results show that liberal market economies’ ?scal policies are far

18、 less counter-cyclical than coordinated market economies’ and that mixed market economies are a-cyclical. Those results stand in sharp contrast with Soskice (2007)’s prediction according to which LMEs’ ?scal policy shou

19、ld be accommodating and that of CMEs should be conservative. </p><p>　　不同資本主義體制下的反周期性預(yù)算政策比較</p><p>　?。˙runo Amable，Karim Azizi，結(jié)構(gòu)變化和經(jīng)濟(jì)動(dòng)態(tài)，第30卷，1-9頁(yè)）</p><p><b>　　摘要</b>&

20、lt;/p><p>　　宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策在不同資本主義體制下發(fā)揮的作用在很大程度上被忽視了。最近學(xué)界有研究報(bào)告稱(chēng)非自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)體（即統(tǒng)籌市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)）相對(duì)于自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)應(yīng)該有更少的調(diào)節(jié)性宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策（即反周期性政策）。本文利用18個(gè)經(jīng)合組織國(guó)家在1980到2009年之間的時(shí)間序列橫截面數(shù)據(jù)，檢驗(yàn)了這一假設(shè)，更為重要的是檢驗(yàn)了在自由主義和非自由主義的資本主義制度下，斟酌使用的財(cái)政政策對(duì)宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)的影響是否有所不同。檢驗(yàn)的結(jié)果并沒(méi)

21、有支持非自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)體相對(duì)于自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)應(yīng)有更少的反周期性政策的結(jié)論。恰恰相反，結(jié)果表明，在前一經(jīng)濟(jì)體中會(huì)有更多的反周期性政策。</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞:資本主義類(lèi)型,宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策;財(cái)政政策</p><p>　　宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策與不同的資本主義體制</p><p>　　宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策的反周期性的評(píng)估</p><p>　　為了評(píng)估一項(xiàng)財(cái)政政策是有

22、助于經(jīng)濟(jì)的周期性波動(dòng)還是反周期性的，通常需要利用一些財(cái)政政策指標(biāo)（例如預(yù)算平衡等），來(lái)衡量其對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的影響。有助于經(jīng)濟(jì)的周期性波動(dòng)的政策（正相關(guān)政策）意味著在經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退時(shí)預(yù)算盈余的減少或預(yù)算赤字的增加。在這種情況下，因?yàn)轭A(yù)算平衡將會(huì)向擴(kuò)張性發(fā)展。與此相反，如果震蕩指標(biāo)和代表財(cái)政政策變量之間是負(fù)相關(guān)的，財(cái)政政策被認(rèn)為是有助于周期性波動(dòng)的（負(fù)相關(guān)政策）。經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退將導(dǎo)致一個(gè)更緊的預(yù)算平衡，并將加強(qiáng)政策初期的對(duì)周期性的影響。綜上所述，在經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退時(shí)反

23、周期性政策是擴(kuò)張性的，在經(jīng)濟(jì)繁榮時(shí)反周期性政策是緊縮性的。有助于周期性波動(dòng)的政策的效果與之正好相反。</p><p><b>　　不同的宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策</b></p><p>　　當(dāng)前的有關(guān)資本主義制度的文獻(xiàn)(Hall and Soskice, 2001)大都將不同的發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)體按一定的制度特征區(qū)分：勞資關(guān)系，教育和職業(yè)培訓(xùn)，公司治理，企業(yè)間關(guān)系和公司內(nèi)部的協(xié)調(diào)。主要將資

24、本主義制度分為兩種類(lèi)型：自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)（LME）和協(xié)調(diào)的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)（CME），這二者不僅有著不同的制度特征，而且在一定的宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)特征，尤其是比較優(yōu)勢(shì)和產(chǎn)業(yè)專(zhuān)業(yè)化方面，都有顯著的不同。</p><p>　　這些文獻(xiàn)主要著重于長(zhǎng)期的、緩慢演變的兩個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)體模型的差異，相對(duì)而言很少注意短期的政策（Amable，2009）。自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)（LME）和協(xié)調(diào)的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)（CME）在宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策（包括財(cái)政政策和貨幣政策）方面是否有顯著的

25、區(qū)別呢？在最近的論文中，索斯凱斯（2007），卡林和索斯凱斯（2009）和艾弗森和索斯凱斯（2010）提出了一些理論和實(shí)證研究，針對(duì)總需求管理制度（ADMRS）清晰地對(duì)比了兩種資本主義經(jīng)濟(jì)體制。更具體地說(shuō)，它認(rèn)為，如美國(guó)這樣的自由的經(jīng)濟(jì)體相比德國(guó)這樣的非自由經(jīng)濟(jì)體，將施行更多的協(xié)調(diào)市場(chǎng)政策和反周期性宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策。面臨著同樣的不利的宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)沖擊，一個(gè)協(xié)調(diào)的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)會(huì)實(shí)施緊縮的預(yù)算政策，以限制赤字，而自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)會(huì)選擇擴(kuò)大預(yù)算赤字，以抵消不

26、利的經(jīng)濟(jì)形勢(shì)對(duì)消費(fèi)活動(dòng)或失業(yè)水平的影響。不同的總需求管理制度反映各類(lèi)型的資本主義將面臨不同的約束和機(jī)會(huì)。</p><p><b>　　結(jié)論</b></p><p>　　本文通過(guò)對(duì)不同類(lèi)型的資本主義國(guó)家作區(qū)分，研究了宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)影響與斟酌使用的財(cái)政政策之間的聯(lián)系。事實(shí)上，最近在VoC的文獻(xiàn)中提出，自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)預(yù)計(jì)將采取協(xié)調(diào)性的宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)政策，而非自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)將采取更為保守的立

27、場(chǎng)。本文利用自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)和協(xié)調(diào)的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)區(qū)分，并考慮到現(xiàn)有的適中型市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)，設(shè)立模型，檢驗(yàn)了在過(guò)去30年內(nèi)18個(gè)經(jīng)合組織國(guó)家的財(cái)政政策的利周期性與反周期性性質(zhì)。</p><p>　　本檢驗(yàn)結(jié)果表示，自由主義市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的財(cái)政政策的反周期性要遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)弱于統(tǒng)籌市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)，而混合型經(jīng)濟(jì)體呈現(xiàn)非周期性。這些結(jié)果與索斯凱斯（2007）的預(yù)測(cè)，即自由主義市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的財(cái)政政策應(yīng)該是擴(kuò)張的而非自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)將采取更為保守的政策，形成了鮮