宏观深度报告20250805：跨越百年的产能调整经验：如何从失衡到再平衡

Group 1: Historical Capacity Adjustment Cases - The report analyzes three historical cases of capacity adjustment: the Long Depression (1873-1896), the Great Depression (1929), and Japan's capacity reductions in the 1970s and 1990s, highlighting lessons for supply-demand rebalancing[6] - During the Long Depression, nominal wage growth was only 5.4% in the U.S., while industrial output increased over 300%, leading to a significant supply-demand imbalance[10] - The Great Depression saw a shift from non-intervention to government intervention, with policies like the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) and the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) implemented to stabilize production and demand[30][34] Group 2: Mechanisms of Supply-Demand Rebalancing - Capacity imbalances can create a negative feedback loop, potentially lasting 20-30 years if not controlled, as seen in the Long Depression and Japan's lost decades[1] - Government intervention is more effective than non-intervention in addressing capacity imbalances, as demonstrated by the U.S. response to the Great Depression compared to Japan's approach in the 1990s[2] - Successful rebalancing requires simultaneous efforts in controlling capacity, restoring credit, and stabilizing employment, rather than relying solely on supply or demand policies[3] Group 3: Economic and Social Implications - Large-scale supply-demand imbalances can present opportunities for improving labor wages and boosting domestic demand, facilitating a shift from production-oriented to consumption-oriented economies[4] - In the U.S., labor movements during the Long Depression led to wage increases, with wage growth eventually reaching 49% of nominal GDP growth by the late 19th century[26] - Japan's capacity adjustments in the 1970s relied on government-led initiatives, while the 1990s saw a shift towards market-driven solutions, resulting in slower recovery from imbalances[5]