论文“人民币汇率变动对我国经常项目的影响”的外文翻译中文部分：中国独立的货币政策，汇率制度和资本帐户作者：普拉萨德国籍：美国出处及类别：在彼得森国际经济研究所关于中国人民币汇率政策的会议上提交的发表时间及页码：2007年10月19日，P7-13中国的货币政策当然是最近以来最受瞩目的。
维持固定汇率是否是部分重商主义者蓄意的战略以促进出口导向型增长，一直受到激烈的辩论。
一方面，自1995年以来中国一直采取相对美元较为稳定的汇率。
甚至在亚洲（金融）危机时期人民币有巨大的贬值诱惑时这项政策也仍然维持。
另一方面，这十年期间汇率一直保持升值，而仅仅通过大规模干预外汇市场。
随着出口的持续高速增长和经常帐户盈余的不断膨胀，在2006年几乎达到国内生产总值的10%，这一直被视为严重低估货币的初步证据。
正如下文更加详细的讨论，（我们）关注的主要问题之一是：汇率灵活性的缺失不仅降低了货币政策的独立性，而且阻碍了银行业的改革。
中国人民银行无法把利率作为一个主要的货币政策工具，这意味着，信贷增长将由粗放和非以市场为导向的工具所控制，包括信贷增长的目标/上限以及“非审慎的行政措施”。
中国对汇率政策和资本帐户自由化的方式可能表明了一个愿望，即在贸易开放和资本流动时维护国内、外的稳定。
而由此带来的大量的外汇储备积累可能是作为由脆弱的银行体系造成的漏洞的保险。
但有一点，当扭曲的政策需要维持时，这种方式会产生不平衡，潜在地强加了巨大的福利代价，自己也成为不稳定的根源。
首先，为什么汇率制度如此重要？毕竟，汇率只是一个相对的价格。
此外，经济模型告诉我们，宏观经济基本面最终取决于真正重要的---实际汇率，而非名义汇率。
也就是说，如果名义汇率不跟随经济基本面的调整而调整，（则）相对价格水平就会调整。
但是政策的结合如金融压抑和封闭的资本帐户可以在一定时间内延迟这种调整。
虽然通过保持低估的汇率可以提高出口竞争力，（但）在应付各种冲击时会产生微妙的间接成本，以经济福利和政策灵活性的减少的形式。
不灵活的汇率将会带来哪些代价？下面的示意图列出了一些联系，尽管这应当被认为是启发式图，因为这里的描述忽略了许多复杂的关系。
主要的一点是一个非灵活性的汇率，而不是经济中不平衡的根源，需要大量的扭曲性政策来长时间的维护。
正是这些扭曲---通过多种渠道---损害经济福利并可能随着时间的推移转移经济中风险的平衡。
汇率缺乏灵活性使宏观调控政策和改革复杂化建立正确的联系一个独立的利率政策是改善国内宏观经济管理、促进稳定增长和低通货膨胀的一个重要工具。
随着中国经济变得更加复杂、更加以市场为导向，和过去一样通过指挥和控制的方法去管理将变的更加困难。
通过贸易的增加和与世界经济加强金融联系，使它更容易受到全球影响，也将更容易受到外部冲击。
货币政策通常是对宏观经济冲击的第一道防线，包括内部和外部冲击。
因此，拥有独立的货币政策对于整个宏观经济的稳定性是非常重要的。
如果中央银行的任务是实现汇率目标，那么货币政策的独立性却是一种幻想。
资本管制可以防止资金自由地在一个经济体进进出出，在一定程度上为货币政策（起到）隔绝（作用）。
但资本管制有明显的渗漏（非官方的流入和流出中国本身就充分证明了这一点），而且随着时间的推移往往变得越来越不那么有效。
因此，灵活的汇率机制是建立一个独立的货币政策的先决条件。
然而，开放资本帐户先于引入更具灵活性的汇率可能对将来会造成严重问题。
历史上有许多国家开放资本帐户，看上去情况很好，甚至同时保持了固定汇率，当受到资本突然停止和/或逆转时，汇率就会面临大幅的贬值。
马文·古德弗兰德和我都认为中国应采取一个明确的通货膨胀目标---在长期范围内的通货膨胀率和对低通货膨胀率是货币政策优先选择的明确认识---作为一种新的货币政策支柱。
通货膨胀目标，再加上汇率的灵活性，将是稳定国内需求来应对内外部宏观经济冲击的良方。
事实上，强化通货膨胀率稳定是货币政策实现更广泛目标的最好方式，如金融的稳定和高就业增长。
随着时间的推移，通货膨胀目标将为汇率的灵活性提供一个基础。
因此，在我国的短期和长远利益中，汇率改革将被看作全面改革战略的一个关键组成部分。
两个相关点是值得注意的。
独立的利率政策需要一个灵活的汇率，而不是一次性重估或一系列地重估。
一种灵活的汇率可以缓冲一些利率变化的影响，特别是在抵消由这种变化引起的资本流进流出诱惑。
一次性重估可以暂时解决这个问题，但如果利率开始必然性地朝着另一个方向变动，或如果投资者对资本流入流出的情绪和压力发生转变，那么就会随之引起更多的问题。
这就是为什么专注于一次性重估来弥补过去的罪孽不让我们到达某种地步，无论是政策辩论的形式还是实行改革的形式都不起作用。
另一关键点是，汇率的灵活性不应该与充分的资本账户开放相混淆。
一个开放的资本帐户将允许汇率自由浮动并由市场决定。
即便资本帐户没有完全开放，利率仍然可以实现灵活，货币政策独立性目标仍然可以实现。
事实上，如上所述，为什么使资本帐户的进一步逐渐开放更合适，而不是汇率的灵活性。
资本账户的自由流动是一个有益的长期目标，但从短期来看没有一个高的优先性。
英文部分：Monetary Policy Independence, the Currency Regime, and the Capital Account in ChinaAuthor：Eswar S. PrasadNationality: AmericaSourse and Type: Paper presented at the Conference on China's Exchange Rate Policy Peterson Institute for International EconomicsJournal time: October 19, 2007， P7-13China’s currency policy has of co urse received the most attention of late. Whether the maintenance of a fixed exchange rate is part of a deliberate mercantilist strategy to promote export-led growth has been the subject of intense debate. On the one hand, China has had a relatively stable exchange rate relative to the U.S. dollar since 1995. This policy was sustained even through the Asian crisis when the temptations for devaluing the currency were great. On the other hand, during this decade the exchange rate has been kept from appreciating only by massive intervention in the exchange market. In tandem with sustained high export growth and a burgeoning current account surplus that nearly hit 10 percent of GDP in 2006, this has been seen as prima facie evidence of a grossly undervalued currency.As discussed in more detail below, one of the principal concerns is that the lack of exchange rate flexibility not only reduces monetary policy independence, it also hampers banking sector reforms. The inability of the PBC to use interest rates as a primary tool of monetary policy implies that credit growth has to be controlled by blunter and non-market-oriented tools, including targets/ceilings for credit growth as well as “non-prudential administrative measures”.China’s approach to exchange rate p oliy and capital account liberalization may be indicative of a desire to maintain stability on thedomestic and external fronts while opening up to trade and financial flows. And the large stock of foreign exchange reserves resulting from these policies may serve as insurance against vulnerabilities arising from a weak banking system.But there comes a point when the policy distortions needed to maintain this approach could generate imbalances, impose potentially large welfare costs, and themselves become a source of instability.To begin with, why is the exchange rate regime of such importance? After all, the exchange rate is just a relative price. Moreover, economic models tell us that macroeconomic fundamentals will eventually win out in terms of what really matters--- the real exchange rate rather than the nominal exchange rate. That is, if the nominal exchange rate doesn’t adjust in response to changes in fundamentals, relative price levels will adjust. But a combination of policies such as financial repression and a closed capital account can delay this adjustment for a significant period. While this can boost export competitiveness by keeping the exchange rate undervalued, there can be subtle indirect costs, in terms of both economic welfare and reduced policy flexibility in responding to various shocks.What are the costs of an inflexible exchange rate? The schematic diagram below lays out some of the connections, although this should of course be recognized as a heuristic diagram that ignores many of the complexities in the relationships depicted here. The main point is that an inflexible exchange rate, while not the root cause of imbalances in the economy, requires a large set of distortionary policies for its maintenance over long periods. It is these distortions that—through multiple channels—hurt economic welfare and could, over time, shift the balance of risks in the economy.Lack of Exchange Rage Flexibility Complicates Macro Policy and ReformsMaking the Right ConnectionsAn independent interest rate policy is a key tool for improving domestic macroeconomic management and promoting stable growth and low inflation. As the Chinese economy becomes more complex and market-oriented, it will become harder to manage through command and control methods as in the past. And, as it becomes more exposed to global influences through its rising trade and financial linkages to the world economy, it will also become more exposed to external shocks. Monetary policy is typically the first line of defense against macroeconomic shocks, both internal and external. Hence, having anindependent monetary policy is important for overall macroeconomic stability.Monetary policy independence is, however, a mirage if the central bank is mandated to attain an exchange rate objective. Capital controls, which prevent money from moving in an out of an economy easily, do insulate monetary policy to some extent. But capital controls are notoriously leaky(the unofficial flows into and out of China itself are ample testimony to this) and tend to become increasingly less effective over time. Thus, a flexible exchange rate is a prerequisite for an independent monetary policy.However, opening the capital account ahead of introducing greater flexibility in the exchange rate could pose serious problems in the future. History is replete with examples of countries that opened up the capital account while things looked good, even while keeping their exchange rates fixed, and were then subject to large exchange rate depreciations when they were subject to sudden stops and/or reversals of capital flows.Marvin Goodfriend and I have argued that China should adopt an explicit inflation objective—a long-run range for the inflation rate and an explicit acknowledgement that low inflation is the priority for monetary policy—as a new anchor for monetary policy . An inflation objective, coupled with exchange rate flexibility, would work best to stabilize domestic demand in response to internal and external macroeconomic shocks. Indeed, focusing on inflation stability is the best way for monetary policy to achieve broader objectives such as financial stability and high employment growth. Over time, the inflation objective would provide a basis for currency flexibility. Thus, exchange rate reform will be seen as a key component of an overall reform strategy that is in China’s short- and long-term interests.Two related points are worth noting. Independent interest rate policy requires a flexible exchange rate, not a one-off revaluation or a sequence of revaluations. A flexible exchange rate buffers some of the effects of interest rate changes, especially in terms of offsetting the temptation for capital to flow in or out in response to such changes. A one-off revaluation can solve this problem temporarily, but could create even more problems subsequently if interest rate actions in a different direction become necessary, or if investor sentiment and the pressures for capital inflows or outflows shift. This is why thefocus on a large one-time revaluation to atone for past sins doesn’t get us anywhere,either in terms of the policy debate or in terms of effecting reforms that really matter.Another crucial point is that exchange rate flexibility should not be confused with full opening of the capital account. An open capital account would allow the currency to float freely and be market-determined. But the exchange rate can be made flexible and the objective of monetary policy independence achieved even if the capital account is not fully open. Indeed, as noted above, there are good reasons why it is preferable to move more gradually on capital account opening than on exchange rate flexibility. A free float with an open capital account is a useful long-term objective, but is not a high priority in the short run.。
