Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the divergence between the traditional neoclassical exchange rate models and the realities of modern financial systems, emphasizing the need to consider financial factors alongside real economic indicators when assessing exchange rates [2][3][6]. Exchange Rate Framework - The neoclassical framework emphasizes real economic factors while downplaying the impact of financial factors on exchange rates, which may lead to significant misjudgments in exchange rate assessments [3][6]. - In contrast, post-Keynesian economics posits that capital flows and expectations are the core mechanisms driving exchange rate fluctuations, especially in a highly financialized economy [3][6][15]. Types of Exchange Rates - There are three main forms of exchange rates: bilateral exchange rates (especially against the US dollar), nominal effective exchange rates, and real effective exchange rates, with the latter being crucial for analyzing the impact on trade [5][6]. Factors Influencing Exchange Rates - Estimating the so-called "equilibrium value" of exchange rates is complex due to the multitude of bilateral and multilateral factors involved, with traditional models often failing to account for the significant role of capital flows [6][12]. - The post-Keynesian perspective argues that capital flows dominate exchange rate determination, as evidenced by the vast scale of foreign exchange market transactions compared to international trade [14][15]. Historical Context and Examples - Historical instances, such as the volatility of the US dollar post-Bretton Woods and the Asian financial crisis, illustrate the inadequacies of neoclassical models in explaining exchange rate movements [16]. - The article highlights the phenomenon of the Chinese yuan's "internal depreciation and external appreciation" post-2005, which aligns more closely with post-Keynesian theories than with neoclassical assumptions [17][18]. Recent Developments - Recent data indicates that despite improvements in China's manufacturing competitiveness, the real effective exchange rate of the yuan has depreciated by 16% from January 2022 to October 2025, contradicting neoclassical predictions [18].

宏观经济研究 2025.12.14 传统思维易误估汇率 近期市场比较关注人民币汇率走势，有研究基于传统汇率模型（新古典思维）来评估人民币汇率与其 所谓的均衡值的差距，得出人民币汇率与其所谓的"均衡值"明显偏离的结论。评估汇率高估或者低 估本身就非常不容易，而且其结论与所采用的框架紧密相关。 简而言之，常用的新古典汇率框架强调实体而轻视金融对汇率的影响。常用的汇率模型，比如购买力 平价、巴拉萨-萨缪尔森模型等就是如此。即使一些模型也加入了利率与货币等变量，但在新古典框架 中，资本流动和外汇交易更多被视为对实体基本面的反应，而不是决定长期汇率水平的独立、持续因 素。当今，每年全球外汇市场的交易量是实体贸易量的几十倍，聚焦经常项目而忽视资本流动，聚焦 实体而轻视金融对汇率的影响与现实差距很大。与此不同，（后）凯恩斯主义并不否认实体经济和经 常项目的重要性，但认为在现代金融体系下，资本流动和预期变化构成汇率波动的核心机制。资金流 动既影响短期汇率，也在长期内影响汇率走势，购买力平价所决定的汇率水平可能一直达不到、甚至 在方向上也可能发生持续偏离。 我们不必将新古典汇率框架与（后）凯恩斯汇率框架完全对立，但在金融高度发 ...