劳动力市场结构性改革的宏观经济效应:一个模拟分析

Macroeconomic Effects of Labor Market Structural Reform:A Simulation Analysis

文章考虑了我国非正规就业普遍存在的现实,构建包含非正规就业的动态随机一般均衡模型,分析我国劳动力市场结构性改革的短期效应和长期效应。研究发现,不同劳动力市场结构性改革的短期效应与长期效应存在显著差异:(1)就长期效应而言,以降低正规部门雇佣成本为内容的第一种劳动力市场结构性改革、以降低正规部门议价能力为内容的第二种劳动力市场结构性改革均有助于产出的增加以及就业的正规化(即长期收益);(2)就短期效应而言,第一种劳动力市场结构性改革在短期中引起产出的显著下降和失业的显著上升(即短期疼痛),而第二种劳动力市场结构性改革则并未引起失业的增加。进一步,文章发现货币政策对劳动力市场结构性改革的效应具有重要影响:就基准政策看,旨在降低雇佣成本的第一种劳动力市场结构性改革的效应具有显著的"以短期疼痛换取长期收益"的特征;在Evans规则下,第一种劳动力市场结构性改革的这一特征则不复存在。因此,无论采用哪一种改革方式,Evans规则均可以作为配套性货币政策;并且就改革的效果而言,第二种劳动力市场结构性改革可能更为可取。

Taking universally existing informal employment in China into account,this paper constructs a DSGE model including informal employment and investigates the short-term and long-term effects of labor market structural reform.The result shows that,different labor market structural reform has significant differences in short-term and longterm effects：firstly,for long-term effect,both the first labor market structural reform aiming at the decrease in the hiring costs of the formal sectors and the second labor market structural reform aiming at the decrease in the bargaining power of the formal sectors are conducive to the increase in output and the normalization of employment（long-term returns）;secondly,for short-term effect,the first labor market structural reform leads to the significant reduction in output and the significant rise in unemployment in the short term（short-term pain）,but the second labor market structural reform does not give rise to the increase in unemployment.Furthermore,it finds that monetary policy rules affect labor market structural reform significantly：the effect of the benchmark policy,namely the first labor market structural reform aiming at the decrease in the hiring costs,is featured by short-term pain instead of long-term returns;under Evans rule,this feature does not exist.Therefore,no matter which reform mode is adopted,the Evans rule can be used as a complementary monetary policy,and in terms of the reform effects,the second labor market structural reform may be preferable.