标题:
畜产品价格波动对城乡经济关系的影响—基于价格影响局部闭模型The Impacts of Animal Products Prices Fluctuations on the Economic Relations of Urban and Rural Areas—Based on the Partially Closed Price Model of Input-Output Method
作者:
李梦思
关键字:
畜产品价格, 价格影响局部闭模型, 影响对比, 国民经济, 城乡居民消费Animal Products
Price, Partially Closed Price Model, Effect Comparison, National Economy, Consumption of Urban and Rural Residents
期刊名称:
《Statistics and Application》, Vol.3 No.2, 2014-06-27
摘要:
本文基于投入产出价格影响局部闭模型，利用2007年73部门城乡投入产出表，测算比较了各畜产品价格波动对国民经济、相关部门产品价格以及城乡居民生活消费的影响。结果显示：(1) 2007~2013年间，由畜产品价格上涨引起的CPI年均涨幅为0.54%，占其年均实际涨幅的19.34%，如果出现通货膨胀，则畜产品价格上涨是一个潜在的原因。同时由此引起的GDP涨幅是其七年实际涨幅的4.18%，畜产品价格上涨通过成本驱动效应能在一定程度上影响我国国民生产总值；(2) 单个部门来说，除去自身价格波动对自身的影响，畜产品价格波动对种植业部门产品价格的影响最大；(3) 随畜产品价格上涨，城乡居民消费和劳动者报酬同时增加，但是消费支出的增加高于劳动者报酬的增加，城乡居民净收益均趋于减少，城镇居民净收益减少幅度比农村居民净收益减少幅度大1.22%。
Based on the partially closed price Model, we used the urban and rural input-output table with 73 departments of 2007 to quantify the impact of animal products price fluctuations on national economy, the relevant departments’ product price fluctuation and urban-rural residents’ consumption. The main results are as follows: (1) From 2007 to 2013, the annual average of CPI caused by animal products price fluctuations was 0.54%, which accounted for 19.34% of the real annual average of CPI. Animal products price fluctuations are potential reasons for inflation. At the same time, the increase of GDP caused by the fluctuations accounted for 4.18% of the real increase of GDP, animal products prices through cost-driven effect to affect GDP; (2) To remove the impact of its price fluctuations on itself, the planting industry was affected mostly in various industries; (3) With the rising of animal products prices, the consumption and remuneration for workers of urban and rural residents increased at the same time. But the increase of the consumer spending was higher than the increase of the remuneration for workers; both urban and rural residents’ net incomes have the trend of decrease. The decrease of urban residents’ net income was 1.22% more than the decrease of rural residents’ net income.