: 3 :,,,,,,, :, 2005, 2005 7 21 2005, 26,, ( ) 2005 7 21,,?,,?,,,1995 2003 OECD, 112 115, 20 90,,,,,, 1990 2004 15 12 2569, 3178,, 25 %, 40 %? 2004 :,, GDP,2005, WTO,2001 GDP, 418 % 413 % 318 % 317 %,2005,,,,? :,, 11 : 1997, 2002,, 10 %, 25 %, GDP 2 % 5 % 4 3,, :100010, :chendf @drc. gov. cn
2006 2 1 IMF ( 1996 2005),,,,,,,,,, 20 70, IMF,20 80 3, 1997 712, 20 %, 8000, 1 20 90,, ;,,,,,, 21 : (1) 1994,,,, 2002,, 1994-1187, 2004-654 1 (1994 2004) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999-9718 - 17813-15515 - 22215-18712 - 17719-9718 - 27611-43116 - 65411-84113 - 101912 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004-11819 - 4816 7719 18412 27015-113811 - 118617-110818 - 92416-65411 : (2), ( ), 5
:, 2001 515,2003 116,2004, 613,,2001 8516,,2004 22919, 2 2 ( : ) 2001 2002 2003 2004-515 - 218 116 613-18612 - 14617-8010 - 4115 8516 13016 17613 22919 3114-1715 - 6118-345 16719-1215 7311-23411 - 37-2718 - 7219 18615 :, : (3), 2001 18612,, 2002 2004,, 2004 4115 (4),,,,, 2005, ( ) 2005 1 6 84116, 63104 %,,,,1998,,, : 1998 2003,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ( ),,,, 6
2006 2 11 NDF (NDF),,NDF 4000 5000 ;,, 2450, 2 : Π 8127, NDF 4000, Π 7187 Π ( = 8127-014) 21,,, NDF, 31 2003, 2004,1 1600,, 2005 8, 1, 100,, 315 3,, 415 %,, 41, : = - - 3, 2004 12,, 2005 2 100, 30 65,,,,, ( ) 11 7 21,,,,, 21,,,,,,, 7
: 3 ( 200311 200518) :,2005 7 8,,,,, 12,, 31,,,1994 2003, 3103 %, 13104 %,,,, 2004,,, 4 ( 1992 2004) 41,,,,,2,1,,,,,,,,, 51,,,,,,, 8
2006 2,,,,,,, ( ) 11 7 21,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 21,,,,,,,, 013 % ;,,,, 18,,?,,,,,,,, ( ) 9
:, 15 1991,, 90,,,,, (, ) (, ), 1000 4000 ( ), 11, 10 %,,,,,,1995,, 1995 2002,2002 1985, 21,,,, 1992 2004, 1015 % 2711 %, 419 % 1412 % 31,,, 1 4,3 1, 20,,30,, 50,,,,, 1985 1987, 1985,, 41,, 1996 2004,,, 1Π4, ; ( 2000 ), ; ; ( ),, 10
2006 2, 1984 1985 13 %, ;1989 1990 4 %, ;1991 1993, 50 60, 10 %,, ;70 80, 4 %,, ;, 1 %,,,,, :,,,,,,,,,,,,, ( ) 11 :,, 60 %, 40 % 50 %,,,,, 21,,, 1998, M2 6 GDP,, 20 70, 3,,,,,,, 20, (, ), (, ), 80,, 90, 1995,,, LTCM IT, 2001 2004,,,,,!,,,,,,,,, 11
:,,, ( ), :,,,,,,,, ;, 1985 1995,,,,1987 M2 GDP ( ),, 1995 2002,,,,M2 GDP ( ), 2002,, 2004,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 80,,,,,,, 11,? 2001 2004, 4168, 7106,,,,,, 2000 2004 770, 1040,, 650, 70 % 80 %,,,,,, 12 21
2006 2 (1) :,,,,, ( ),,,, :,,,,, G20,, :,,,, :,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ; ( ) ;,,,, ;,,,,,,,,,,,, 2006 13
: 2007,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (2) :,,,,,,,,, G20,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 14
2006 2 I,2005 :,,,2000 :,, C,2005 :,,,2005 :, Patrick Artus, 2005 :,,IXIS flash 163,2005 : ( ), 2 3 4,2005 :,,,2005 :,,,2005 :,,,2004 :, On China Foreign Exchange Reform in the Unbalanced International Monetary System Xia Bin and Chen Daofu (Development Research Center of State Council) Abstract :The over expectation of RMB appreciation is basically due to monetary reasons. But actually the appreciation pressure on the real economy level is not so significant. RMB will remain relatively stable while moving in both ways and sustaining small appreciation1 The floating range will be enlarged when it s right time to do that1 Meanwhile, the influence of exchange rate on the fundamental infrastructure of international trade has been weakened and we can never rely on exchange rate to adjust the trade unbalance automatically. China and the United States should strengthen the cooperation to jointly adjust economic structure for both countries. For China, we need to further highlight the domestic2demand2oriented strategy, and together with the effort of other Asian countries in economy and currency, gradually ease over dependence on the US economy. Key Words :RMB Exchange ; World Trade Pattern ; International Monetary System JEL Classification :F310,F420,N200 ( : ) ( : ) 15