Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2026, Vol. 554 Issue (8): 19-37    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
房地产下行背景下提振居民消费的宏观政策研究
梅冬州, 王宝玲
Macroeconomic Policies for Boosting Household Consumption Amid a Real Estate Downturn
MEI Dongzhou, WANG Baoling
School of International Trade and Economics/China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics
下载:  PDF (2132KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 本文通过实证研究与理论建模,系统剖析房地产市场下行冲击对消费的宏观影响。基于贝叶斯向量自回归模型的实证分析表明,房价下跌对不同收入群体消费的冲击存在显著差异,低收入群体消费降幅显著高于高收入群体,也是总消费走弱的主要因素。为厘清这一传导机制,本文构建包含受信贷约束与不受信贷约束家庭的两代理人新凯恩斯模型。数值模拟结果显示,房价下跌通过金融摩擦与土地财政两个渠道放大经济下行压力。其中,受信贷约束的低收入家庭消费与当期收入强相关,收入下滑直接降低其消费;高收入家庭可通过调整储蓄资产平滑消费。当低收入家庭占比上升时,其消费下降将进一步引致非房产部门产出下降、工资加速下滑,形成收入和总消费持续走弱的负反馈循环。政策评估结果显示,降息缓解投资下降的效果较为显著,但对低收入群体消费的直接提振作用有限;提振消费更有赖于财政政策精准发力。实践中应发挥货币政策与财政政策协同作用,构建投资消费双轮驱动格局。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
()
作者相关文章
梅冬州
王宝玲
关键词:  房地产下行  居民消费  异质性家庭  宏观政策    
Summary:  In recent years, China's economic growth has been severely constrained by the sluggish growth of domestic demand and a persistent consumption slump. While many perspectives argue that the profound adjustment of the real estate market plays a pivotal role, existing research predominantly proceeds from micro-level individual consumption decisions, centering on the “mortgage slave effect” and the “wealth effect”. These studies fail to adequately account for the macroeconomic income effects generated by the real estate sector as a crucial component of the macroeconomy, nor do they consider the heterogeneous impacts on consumption across different income cohorts resulting from the economic recession and income declines triggered by the real estate downturn. Therefore, through empirical research and theoretical modeling, this paper systematically analyzes the macro-level suppressive effects of the real estate downturn on consumption and proposes policy recommendations aimed at stabilizing consumption.
  Empirically, utilizing macroeconomic quarterly data from 2013 to 2024, this paper employs a Bayesian Vector Autoregression (BVAR) model to examine the heterogeneous impacts of declining housing prices on the consumption of different income groups. The results indicate that the economic downturn induced by declining housing prices exerts significantly heterogeneous shocks across cohorts: facing severe credit constraints, low-income groups experience a contraction in consumption that far exceeds that of high-income groups in both magnitude and speed, rendering them the core drivers dragging down aggregate consumption.
  To explain in depth the mechanisms behind this phenomenon, this paper constructs a Two-Agent New Keynesian (TANK) model comprising credit-unconstrained high-income households and credit-constrained low-income households. The analysis demonstrates that declining housing prices exacerbate the economic downturn through the financial friction and land finance channels. Because low-income households are credit-constrained and unable to smooth consumption via borrowing, their consumption expenditure is strongly correlated with their current income; thus, the income decline caused by the recession directly compresses their consumption. In contrast, high-income households can buffer income volatility by adjusting savings to achieve intertemporal consumption smoothing, rendering their consumption less susceptible to economic downturns. Consequently, the drastic decline in the consumption of low-income households is the critical factor pulling down aggregate consumption. Furthermore, when the proportion of low-income households increases, their consumption decline triggers a negative feedback loop, characterized by falling output in the non-real estate sector, plunging labor demand, and accelerating wage cuts, which leads to an accelerating contraction in aggregate consumption.
  Based on these findings, this paper explores policy measures to mitigate the consumption slump. Given that low-income households are credit-constrained, the interest rate transmission channel of monetary policy has limited direct impact on this group. While interest rate cuts are highly effective in mitigating the investment slump, their role in alleviating the consumption decline among low-income households is limited. Mitigating the consumption decline of low-income households therefore requires fiscal policy: consumption subsidies exhibit the most significant effect on stabilizing aggregate consumption, whereas government spending performs best in cushioning the decline in output. Policy practices must emphasize the synergy between monetary and fiscal policies: monetary policy creates an accommodative environment to boost investment, while fiscal policy directly activates the consumption demand of low-income groups to drive consumption. Together, they form a dual-engine framework driven by both investment and consumption, synergistically resolving the dilemma of deficient domestic demand.
  The innovations and contributions of this paper are threefold. First, by incorporating the macroeconomic impacts of the profound real estate adjustment into the analytical framework, it systematically elucidates the macro mechanisms through which the real estate downturn suppresses consumption via the financial friction and land finance channels, thereby providing a systemic macroeconomic perspective for understanding the real estate-consumption nexus. Second, through the BVAR and TANK models, it reveals the transmission path through which declining housing prices induce an economic recession and low-income household consumption drags down aggregate consumption, systematically analyzing the critical role of heterogeneous households therein. Third, it systematically evaluates the effects of macroeconomic policy within a heterogeneous-household framework, revealing both the limitations of monetary policy in boosting consumption and the significant advantages of fiscal policy. This provides theoretical support for the precise design of macroeconomic policies during periods of profound economic adjustment.
Keywords:  Real Estate Downturn    Household Consumption    Heterogeneous Households    Macroeconomic Policies
JEL分类号:  E21   E32   E61  
基金资助: * 本文感谢国家社会科学基金重大项目(22&ZD131)的资助。感谢匿名审稿人的宝贵意见,文责自负。
通讯作者:  梅冬州,经济学博士,教授,中央财经大学国际经济与贸易学院,E-mail:meidongzhoupku@126.com.   
作者简介:  王宝玲,博士研究生,中央财经大学中国经济与管理研究院,E-mail: wangblbjut@126.com.
引用本文:    
梅冬州, 王宝玲. 房地产下行背景下提振居民消费的宏观政策研究[J]. 金融研究, 2026, 554(8): 19-37.
MEI Dongzhou, WANG Baoling. Macroeconomic Policies for Boosting Household Consumption Amid a Real Estate Downturn. Journal of Financial Research, 2026, 554(8): 19-37.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2026/V554/I8/19
[1] 白重恩和钱震杰,2009,《谁在挤占居民的收入——中国国民收入分配格局分析》,《中国社会科学》第5期,第99~115页。
[2] 冯明,2023,《国民经济核算视角下中国居民消费率的因素分解研究——对“消费能力说”和“消费意愿说”的定量考察》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第5期,第180~201页。
[3] 傅勇和张晏,2007,《中国式分权与财政支出结构偏向:为增长而竞争的代价》,《管理世界》第3期,第4~12页。
[4] 高崧耀、王佳欣和崔百胜,2025,《房地产市场调整、银行资产负债表与货币政策应对》,《金融研究》第3期,第40~57页。
[5] 金洪飞和陈莹莹,2023,《住房价格、货币政策和收入差距》,《管理科学学报》第9期,第87~109页。
[6] 李江一,2018,《“房奴效应”导致居民消费低迷了吗?》,《经济学(季刊)》第1期,第405~430页。
[7] 刘斌,2008,《我国DSGE模型的开发及在货币政策分析中的应用》,《金融研究》第10期,第1~21页。
[8] 刘靖和陈斌开,2021,《房价上涨扩大了中国消费不平等吗?》,《经济学(季刊)》第4期,第1253~1274页。
[9] 卢洪友和杜亦譞,2019,《中国财政再分配与减贫效应的数量测度》,《经济研究》第2期,第4~20页。
[10] 梅冬州、崔小勇和吴娱,2018,《房价变动、土地财政与中国经济波动》,《经济研究》第1期,第35~49页。
[11] 孟宪春,2023,《房价对家庭债务和财富分布的影响:理论机制与应对策略》,《经济研究》第4期,第171~189页。
[12] 王擎和田娇,2016,《银行资本监管与系统性金融风险传递——基于DSGE模型的分析》,《中国社会科学》第3期,第99~122页。
[13] 王曦、温瑞昌和汪玲,2024,《异质性家庭、消费品结构与消费刺激政策效果》,《中国工业经济》第10期,第5~23页。
[14] 徐忠、张雪春和张颖,2011,《初始财富格局与居民可支配收入比重下降趋势》,《金融研究》第1期,第15~27页。
[15] 颜色和朱国钟,2013,《“房奴效应”还是“财富效应”?——房价上涨对国民消费影响的一个理论分析》,《管理世界》第3期,第34~47页。
[16] 张浩、易行健和周聪,2017,《房产价值变动、城镇居民消费与财富效应异质性——来自微观家庭调查数据的分析》,《金融研究》第8期,第50~66页。
[17] 周上尧和王胜,2021,《中国影子银行的成因、结构及系统性风险》,《经济研究》第7期,第78~95页。
[18] Bilbiie, F. O., 2008, “Limited Asset Markets Participation, Monetary Policy and (Inverted) Aggregate Demand Logic”,Journal of Economic Theory, 140(1), pp.162~196.
[19] Chen, S., M. B. Devereux, K. Shi and J. Xu, 2023, “Consumption Heterogeneity and Monetary Policy in an Open Economy”,Journal of Monetary Economics, 140, pp.1~15.
[20] Christensen, I. and A. Dib, 2008, “The Financial Accelerator in an Estimated New Keynesian Model”,Review of Economic Dynamics, 11(1), pp.155~178.
[21] Gertler, M., S. Gilchrist and F. M. Natalucci, 2007, “External Constraints on Monetary Policy and the Financial Accelerator”,Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 39(2-3), pp.295~330.
[22] Gertler, M. and P. Karadi, 2011, “A Model of Unconventional Monetary Policy”,Journal of Monetary Economics, 58(1), pp.17~34.
[23] Iacoviello, M., 2005, “House Prices, Borrowing Constraints, and Monetary Policy in the Business Cycle”,American Economic Review, 95(3), pp.739~764.
[24] Iacoviello, M. and S. Neri, 2010, “Housing Market Spillovers: Evidence from an Estimated DSGE Model”,American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2(2), pp.125~164.
[25] Mian, A., K. Rao and A. Sufi, 2013, “Household Balance Sheets, Consumption, and the Economic Slump”,The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(4), pp.1687~1726.
[26] Mustre-del-Río, J., J. M. Sánchez, R. Mather and K. Athreya, 2025, “The Effects of Macroeconomic Shocks: Household Financial Distress Matters”, The Review of Financial Studies, 38(2), pp.564~604.
[1] 梅冬州附录 Download
[2] 梅冬州内容精粹 Download
[1] 宋全云, 黎多毅, 程瑞祺. 数字信用与家庭经济风险:护城河还是风险敞口?[J]. 金融研究, 2026, 552(6): 150-168.
[2] 李家山, 易行健, 何启志, 周利. 股票市场财富效应与居民消费意愿——来自中国家庭微观调查数据的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 538(4): 170-188.
[3] 王擎, 秦慧颖, 盛夏. 金融科技、货币政策传导与消费——来自大科技平台个人用户的微观证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 545(11): 1-18.
[4] 孙鲲鹏, 李新阳, 肖星. 就业政策如何影响微观企业用工行为?——来自互联网招聘大数据的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 544(10): 133-150.
[5] 易行健, 张凌霜, 徐舒, 周聪. 商业健康保险、预防性储蓄动机与居民消费支出——理论与经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 514(4): 130-148.
[6] 黄家林, 傅虹桥, 宋泽. 补充医疗保险对居民消费的影响——来自城乡居民大病保险的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 508(10): 58-76.
[7] 易行健, 周利. 数字普惠金融发展是否显著影响了居民消费——来自中国家庭的微观证据[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 461(11): 47-67.
[8] 王宇伟, 盛天翔, 周耿. 宏观政策、金融资源配置与企业部门高杠杆率[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 451(1): 36-52.
[9] 张浩, 易行健, 周聪. 房产价值变动、城镇居民消费与财富效应异质性——来自微观家庭调查数据的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 446(8): 50-66.
[10] 龙少波, 陈璋, 胡国良. 货币政策、房价波动对居民消费影响的路径研究[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 432(6): 52-66.
[1] 王丽艳, 马光荣. 帆随风动、人随财走?——财政转移支付对人口流动的影响[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 448(10): 18 -34 .
[2] 吕若思, 刘青, 黄灿, 胡海燕, 卢进勇. 外资在华并购是否改善目标企业经营绩效?——基于企业层面的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 112 -127 .
[3] 高然, 龚六堂. 土地财政、房地产需求冲击与经济波动[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 442(4): 32 -45 .
[4] 祝继高, 李天时, 尤可畅. 房地产价格波动与商业银行贷款损失准备——基于中国城市商业银行的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 447(9): 83 -98 .
[5] 杨晓兰, 金雪军. 我国股票市场熔断机制的磁力效应:基于自然实验的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 447(9): 161 -177 .
[6] 李建军, 马思超. 债券违约对涉事信用评级机构的影响:基于中国信用债市场违约事件的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 441(3): 116 -129 .
[7] 李青原, 黄威, 王红建. 最终控制人投资组合集中度、股票投资回报与对冲策略[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 446(8): 145 -160 .
[8] 李政. “811汇改”提高了人民币汇率中间价的市场基准地位吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 442(4): 1 -16 .
[9] 苏治, 卢曼, 李德轩. 深度学习的金融实证应用:动态、贡献与展望[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 443(5): 111 -126 .
[10] 申广军, 欧阳伊玲, 李力行. 技能结构的地区差异:金融发展视角[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 445(7): 45 -61 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1