What's really new about policy modeling? An assessment on the basis of the U.S. federal government experience

This article is an attempt to look at where policy modeling is today in reality as opposed to where it is often perceived to be by those who are its proponents. To do this, an impressionistic survey is made of the state of the art, looking at such factors as model theory, structure, data, validation, and uses. Finally, some effort is made to take the results of this examination and use the conclusions reached to suggest what the future of policy modeling might be and what yet unexplored avenues remain to the model builders and users.     

俄美能源伙伴关系前瞻

"9 11"事件以来,俄美开始调整各自的能源战略,在能源领域展开合作,着力提升"能源伙伴关系"。然而,由于存在一些制约因素,使得俄美能源合作的前景并非一帆风顺。     

论节约能源法的义务本位

不论是从合理利用有限能源和保护环境来看,还是从实现能源价值来看,节约能源法以义务本位是有益的,这也是我国自全球性能源危机以来开展节约能源法制建设实践的选择,并体现在节能技术法律制度、国家支持节能管理制度、建筑物节能管理制度、节约能源法律责任制度等节约能源法律制度中。     

技术互依性、组织间沟通强度与研发外包协调治理模式选择

本文基于组织协调和探索能力供需匹配视角,采用计算机仿真方法深入考察技术互依性和组织间沟通强度对研发外包协调治理模式(混合型或整合型)选择的影响。研究表明,技术互依性、组织间沟通强度和研发外包协调治理模式共同影响研发外包情境下组织协调和探索能力供需在不同时间维度的匹配程度,进而决定绩效产出的高低。对于短期绩效产出而言,当技术互依性程度较高时,混合型模式总是最优选择,反之组织间沟通强度影响研发外包协调治理模式的选择。对于长期绩效产出而言,研发外包协调治理模式选择则只与技术互依性有关,且当技术互依性程度较高(低)时,整合型(混合型)模式是最优选择。这些研究结论不仅能为研发外包情境下组织间协调治理机制设计提供新启示,也能够帮助企业识别提高研发外包绩效产出的边界条件。     

基于不同补贴主体的新能源汽车制造商定价决策研究

基于政府目前对新能源汽车消费者及制造商实施补贴的现实背景,假设两家技术水平不等的新能源汽车制造商所生产的产品之间存在替代关系,将制造商产品之间的价格和质量差异纳入考虑范围,构建了新能源汽车制造商最优定价模型,求解了在不同补贴方式下的最优定价方式,并在均衡状态下对模型进行了数值模拟和分析。研究结果表明,在不同补贴方式下,制造商将根据市场竞争环境和补贴投入的变化情况采取不同的定价策略。政府针对消费者的补贴可以使技术水平相对落后的制造商获得更高利润,促使更多的制造商进入新能源汽车产业。对制造商的补贴可以使较高技术水平的制造商获得更高利润,从而促进新能源汽车产业的优胜劣汰。政府补贴主体应由消费者逐步转向制造商,通过政策引导制造商和消费者进一步增进其对新能源汽车质量的重视程度,推动新能源汽车产业的良性发展。     

The cost of war: Impact of sanctions on Russia following the invasion of Ukraine

We use a computable general equilibrium model of world trade to quantify the possible impact of economic sanctions imposed by Western and other countries in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. If sender countries chose 100 % import tariffs and export taxes on trade with Russia, Russia’s GDP would decline by 3–7 % due to the resulting significant reduction in exports. By contrast, the GDP loss for those countries would be 0.2 % for the European economies, but only about 0.05 % for Japan. Although unlikely, the effect of China’s participation in the sanctions would be more significant than that of India. There are concerns about food and energy crises due to economic sanctions against Russia, but the effect on food supplies would not be a serious problem for either senders or third parties. The impact on energy supplies would affect all senders to some extent; for example, there would be a 3% reduction of energy consumption and a 3–4 % rise in electricity and town gas prices in Japan.