回到凯恩斯还是回到熊彼特?——基于主流宏观经济学发展历程的理论反思

Return to Keynes or Resurrect Schumpeter?——Theoretical Reflections Based on the History of Mainstream Macroeconomics

大萧条爆发后,最终占据主流地位的是系统提出摆脱大萧条方案的凯恩斯主义经济学。20世纪70年代以后,凯恩斯主义因无法解释"滞胀"现象而日渐式微。20世纪80年代以来,新古典主义和新凯恩斯主义共同占据主流地位,它们都要对2008年全球金融危机的爆发负责。危机爆发之后,"回到凯恩斯"的声音日渐高涨。但是凯恩斯主义宏观政策只能防止经济深度下滑,并不能带来经济长期繁荣,也不能帮助人们理解市场经济运行的本质特征。在后危机时代,我们需要"回到熊彼特",以熊彼特的创新理论为基本框架来理解经济周期和金融危机,从而找到走出危机的治本之道。

After the outbreak of the Great Depression,due to success in helping governments to overcome the crisis,Keynesian economics became the mainstream theory.In 1970s,Keynesian economics could not explain the stagflation and began to decline.At the same time,Neo-liberalism economics began to rise.Since 1980s,both New Keynesianism and Neo-liberalism has shared the dominating role in macroeconomics.Both of them should bear essential responsibility for the global financial crisis began in 2008.In recent years,many important economists put forward a controversial proposal 'return to Keynes'.However,the basic effect of Keynesian macroeconomic policy is to prevent deep recession rather than bring long-term prosperity.Moreover,Keynesianism does not help to understand the essential characteristic of economic development.In the post-crisis era,we need to resurrect Schumpeterian economics.Specifically,in order to identify the root of the problem,we should regard Schumpeterian innovation theory as the basic framework for understanding business cycle and financial crisis.