深入探索ICP隐含的经济测度问题--评《GDP、福利和健康:2017年轮ICP的若干思考》

An In-depth Exploration of the Economic Measurement Issues Implied in ICP:Review of GDP,Wellbeing and Health:Thoughts on the 2017 Round of the International Comparison Program

迪顿教授和施莱尔先生的论文《GDP,Wellbeing and Health:Thoughts on the 2017 Round of the International Comparison Program》(Deaton和Schreyer,2020)针对2017年轮国际比较项目(ICP)重点讨论了ICP的经济测度基础及其分析应用。本文按照原文结构概述了论文中值得关注和思考的问题,并对文中内容所引发的ICP方法论问题提出了系列看法。第一,ICP数据结果可得出反直觉的认知,面临"反基本事实"的风险;第二,ICP用相近项比较替代相同项比较,忽视了生产者视角中的价格与质量同一性,忽略了名义价格与实际价格的区分,这是影响实际产出国际比较质量的根本原因;第三,超越GDP实质上就是超越SNA,采用"GDP+"的方式未必能够解决经济统计方法论的内在一致性;第四,"国内PPP"的倡议意味着对现有GDP统计的重大否定,即权重处理不当,没有满足经济意义上的可加性;第五,ICP是注重形式一致性还是内容一致性,即注重不同轮次间比较结果的一致性,还是比较方法与现实国际关系的一致性,加大频率的办法是否可以处理好所面临的两难选择;第六,ICP面临的最根本风险是世界各经济体之间的巨大差异,面临不可比的对象如何实现可靠的比较。本文主要结论:ICP尚需系统性的方法论思考,对其结果数据不能盲目采信;ICP进一步研究和统计实践需关注区域比较优先还是全球比较优先问题,以及是否集中进行消费项的国际比较问题。

Deaton and Schreyer(2020)focus on the economic measurement basis of the International Comparison Program(ICP)and its analytical applications based on the 2017 round of the ICP.This article outlines issues of concern and reflection following the structure of their paper,and presents some views on the methodological issues of the ICP triggered by their paper.The arguments include the following six aspects.First,ICP data results can lead to counter-intuitive perceptions and run the risk of being"counterfactual".Second,the ICP replaces"identical"comparisons with"similar"comparisons,ignoring the"producer perspective"of price and quality homogeneity,and ignoring the distinction between"nominal prices"and"real prices",which fundamentally affects the quality of international comparisons of"real output".Third,beyond GDP is essentially beyond SNA,and adopting the"GDP+"approach does not necessarily address the internal consistency of economic statistical methodology.Fourth,the"sub-national PPP"initiative implies a major rejection of existing GDP statistics,and the weights are not properly handled and do not satisfy the"additivity"in the economic sense.Fifth,the ICP faces the dilemma between"consistency of forms"and"consistency of contents".In other words,it should focus on the consistency of comparison results between rounds or the consistency of comparison methods on real international relations.It is a question that whether a more frequent comparison can deal with this dilemma.Sixth,the fundamental risks faced by the ICP are the huge differences between the world’s economies and how to achieve reliable comparisons between incomparable objects.It concludes that the ICP requires systematic methodological thinking,and its results need carefully evaluated.Further research and statistical practice of the ICP can focus on such issues as to give priority to regional or global comparisons,and whether to concentrate on international comparisons of"consumption items"rather than the GDP boundary.