银行体系与经济增长

【作者】 万阿俊；

【导师】 沈开艳；

【作者基本信息】 上海社会科学院 ， 政治经济学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 目前,有关中印两国发展的比较研究成为发展经济学的一个较为热门的领域。毋庸置疑,中印的发展是有差异的,其受制于多种因素作用。但在现代社会,金融体系——特别是商业银行体系,其总量及内在结构和渠道的功能已成为现代经济发展中重要的一级力量。那么,银行体系在中印各自的发展过程中,究竟发挥了怎样各自不同的作用?这是一个众多中印“比较者”都不应该回避的问题,本文试图解决这一问题。而从理论层面来说,目前有关金融与经济增长的关系研究大都是针对整个金融系统(包括银行、资本市场等),而很少具体针对商业银行体系与经济增长关系进行研究,整个理论实际上是不完备的;另外,这次研究往往从宏观的角度(如信贷总量)或者微观层面考察银行体系,而没有关注信贷结构、效率等中观层面的内容,忽视了中观的渠道和机制,实际上很难全面度量金融对经济的实际贡献;最后,现有文献在研究金融与经济增长关系上,基本上都没有关注经济增长的质量问题,忽视了在经济增长方式上的甄别。这些研究大多数发生在英语文献国家(特别是美国),这些国家都已经基本实现了经济增长方式的转型(由传统的重工业化时代向现代工业转型)。而如果转向到研究发展中国家银行体系,不得不考虑经济增长方式问题(经济增长质量)。因此,在这样的背景下,研究和评价中印两国商业银行体系与经济增长的关系问题,这是一项具有重要的实践和理论意义的课题。本文拟从中印两国银行体系发展与演进、银行规模、结构、技术效率、经济增长方式等方面内容,详细探讨银行体系影响经济发展的渠道和可能机制,以及作用效果,并试图从中解析银行体系对经济发展的一般力量和作用机制,在理论和实证上对部分已有研究成果进行发展和演进。文章首先对中国和印度银行体系的演进和现状进行说明,从历史和现实两个角度对中印两国的银行体制和政策、状况进行比较研究,为后文的研究提供制度和逻辑基础。而对任何两个组织(体系)之间的比较,效率比较是不可或缺的一个环节,在本文的第四章,分别运用参数和非参数方法对中印两国的银行体系效率进行比较研究。这种效率比较体现了两国银行体系运营能力的差异。然而,两国银行体系在各自经济增长中发挥了何样的作用?本文的第五章试图解决这个问题,从总量的角度讨论了两国银行体系与经济增长之间的关系,这也是目前较多文献中采用的方法,对信贷投放量——GDP增长率等变量之间的关系展开研究。然而,这种传统的研究方式只注重总量数字层面的意义,却忽视了银行体系在经济增长方式的语境下对经济增长的影响关系,忽视了结构、机制、质量的问题。因此,在本文的第六章,从经济增长模式的视角,解析两国银行体系在经济发展中的作用。本文得出的基本创新和结论如下:(一)中印两国银行体系的改革都基本按照华盛顿共识的准则,立足自由化、稳定及产权变革三个层面。然而,改革并未完全彻底,在信贷指定、银行体系的国有控制等方面,两国仍没有完全放开。从目前情况来看,印度银行体系的开放度相对较大,大部分指标均处在中国前列。(二)运用参数和非参数两种方法比较研究了中印两国2005-2009年商业银行X效率。研究发现,中国银行体系平均效率高于印度印度银行体系。这说明2005年以后,中国银行业的效率有很大提升,此前关于中国金融体系效率远低于印度的观点需要进行修正。在研究模型中加入风险因素后,发现银行效率明显上调,这说明风险因素在两国银行体系效率解释中起到很大的作用。(三)提出了一个内生增长的理论模型,用于解释银行发展与经济增长的关联机制和相互作用,这种相互作用可能导致多重稳定状态的均衡。实证检验上,采用了Hsiao(1981)提出的Granger因果检验修正法,研究中印两国银行体系与经济增长之间的联系。研究发现,因果关系在中国不是双向的,其中代表银行发展的指标对经济增长有作用,然而经济增长并不引起银行体系相应发展——经济增长没有对银行体系形成供给,银行体系的发展按照其自身逻辑独立运动。而从印度来看,经济增长与银行体系发展之间的双向因果关系总体显著成立。印度银行体系与经济增长之间具有供给和需求双重作用,两者是互相协调发展的,银行体系的发展引致经济增长,而增长也相应带来了银行体系的进一步深化。(四)从经济增长模式层面对中印两国银行体系进行比较,立足信贷结构这一核心环节,对两国银行体系在经济增长中的作用展开研究。针对两国银行体系的核心差异——第一,为什么在基础实施投资上,中国的银行明显高于印度银行;第二,为什么在中小企业贷款比率上,中国的银行则明显低于印度银行。本文提出一个假说:在中印两个发展中国家,由于资金资源的稀缺,商业银行的利润是该银行获得存款的增函数。因而,追求存款最大化是商业银行的必然选择。而在银行体系实际运作中,存款和贷款不可分。由于两国经济增长模式的不同,导致存款资源分布存在差异:中国大量的资金集中在大的项目或企业上;印度则是资金资源分散在中小企业和实业领域。这种差异导致追求存款最大的化的两国银行信贷投放结构的差异:即中国大量信贷资金投放到基础实施投资上,对实业领域和中小企业投放较小;而印度则是相反。由于这种差异,两国银行体系行为表现、效率以及风险状况和对经济增长的作用因之呈现较大差距——中国银行业实际投资效率低于印度银行业,而潜在风险则远远高于对方,其对经济增长的真实作用应低于印度银行体系。(五)理论上,对银行体系与经济增长之间关系研究范式上的一个贡献。从现有文献来看,对银行体系与经济增长关系的研究都忽视了在经济增长方式上的甄别。这些研究大多数发生在英语文献国家(特别是美国),而这些国家都已经基本实现了经济增长方式的转型。在研究发展中国家银行体系对经济增长作用时,有必要引入经济增长方式的考量,而不能局限于宏观数据本身。与之相关联的是,本文在银行体系与经济增长关系研究上首次从信贷结构这个中观层面入手,有别于传统研究的宏观或微观层面。本文在引入经济增长方式研究银行体系与经济增长作用关系后,发现在发展中国家中,银行体系的结构与制度并不是影响其作用发挥的关键要素,而经济环境本身(经济增长方式)对金融体系的培育和功能发挥起核心作用。从政策制定者的角度来看,应该从根本层面改变银行业作用的经济增长环境,而不应该仅仅拘泥于银行系统本身的结构和功能的改革和发挥。更多还原

【Abstract】 At present, Comparative study between China and India has become more and more popular. Needless to say, the difference of development between China and India is subject to many factors.While in modern society, the financial system- especially the commercial banking system, its entity, internal structure and channels have become an important force to economic development.Then, what role do banking system play in India and China development?A large number of China-India "comparator" should not avoid the problem,and this paper attempts to address this issue. From the theoretical level, the current finance-growth relationship researches are mostly on the entire financial system (including banking, capital markets, etc.), and few specific to the commercial banking system, so the theory is incomplete; In addition, these studies are mostly taken from a macro point of view (such as total credit), or micro-level, but not concerned about the credit structure and efficiency which are at meso-level, ignoring channels and mechanisms,and will be difficult to fully measure the actual financial contribution; Finally, the existing literature in the study of relationship between finance and economic growth, essentially donot pay attention to the quality of economic growth, ignoring the way of economic growth. Most of these studies are in English literature countries (particularly the United States), these countries have achieved the transformation of economic growth (from the traditional heavy industrial age to modern industry). Turn to research in banking system of developing countries,it could not neglect the way of economic growth (economic growth quality.) Therefore, in this context, researching and evaluating the relationship between economic growth and commercial banking system in China and India is of a great practical and theoretical significance.This paper will discuss about the banking system-economic development channels,possible mechanisms and effect in detail from the aspect of the evolution of the banking system, bank size, structure, technical efficiency, economic growth and other aspects,, and try to get to know the general mechanism of banking system-economic growth,and make contributions to the theoretical and empirical research results.The article firstly describes the evolution and current status of the banking system in China and India, compares policy, situation of the 2 banking systems, establishing the system and logical basis for further research.And as to compare about two organizations (system), efficiency comparison is an integral part, in the article IV, this paper use parametric and nonparametric methods to compare the efficiency between the 2 countries.The efficiency comparation reflects the ability of operations of the 2 banking system. However, what role does each banking system play in their growth process? Chapter V attempts to solve this problem, talking about the relationship between banking system and economic growth in terms of total amount, which is currently used in many researches. However, these traditional methods focus only on the outside, but negect the context in which economic grow, and ignore the structure, mechanism and quality issues. Therefore, in Chapter VI, this paper will discuss about the banking system’s role in the perspective of the growth model.The innovations and conclusions are drawn as follows:(A)The reform of the banking system in China and India are basicly guidelined in accordance with the Washington consensus,focusing on liberalization, stabilization and property changes. However, the reforms do not fully complete—the credit is specified, the state control of the banking system is still not fully loosed. Conserning about the current situation, the openness of the Indian banking system is relatively more than China, and most of the indicators are at the forefront of China.(B)Comparing 2005-2009 X-efficiency which was gotten by parametric and nonparametric method between Chinese and Indian commercial banks,this paper finds that the average efficiency of the China’s banking system is higher than India’s banking system.This indicates that after 2005,China has greatly enhance the efficiency of the banking industry, and the view that China’s financial system are less efficient than India’s need to be amended.Adding the factor of risk,this paper finds banking efficiency significantly increase,indicating that risk factors can significantly explain the efficiency of the banking system in the two countries.(C)Proposing a model of endogenous growth, using to explain the bank-economic growth mechanisms and interactions which may lead to multiple steady-state equilibrium.In the empirical test, using the Hsiao (1981) Granger causality test to study the banking system-economic growth linkages.The results show that banking system-economic growth in China is not a two-way causal relationship——banking development push economic growth, but economic growth does not lead to the corresponding development of the banking system.The banking system develop in its own logic.As to India, there is a two-way causal relationship between economical growth and banking system——They are co-ordinated developing,the development of the banking system is caused by economic growth, and growth has brought a corresponding effect to the banking system.(D) Comparing the banking system between the 2 countries from the view of growth style based on the concept of the credit structure, the paper examine the role of banking system playing in economic growth.As to the core difference between the banking system——first, why in the infrastructure investment, China’s banks are more than Bank of India; Second, why in the ratio of SME loan, the China banks are lower than Bank of India. This paper presents a hypothesis: in the two developing countries(China and India), due to the scarcity of financial resources, the profit of commercial banks is the increasing function of the deposits they obtain.Thus, the pursuit of deposits is commercial banks’inevitable choice. In the actual operation of the banking system, deposits and loans can not be separated.Since the two countries have different models of economic growth, there are differences in the resource distribution: a lot of money are focused on large projects or enterprises in China; while India’s financial resources is scattered in small and medium enterprises and industrial areas. This difference led to the differences of credit structure: In China,a lot of credit funds are put on infrastructure,few funds are set on industrial areas and SMEs; while India is opposite. Because of this difference,the 2 countries’banking system state,efficiency, risk and consequent effects on economic growth show a wide gap——the actual investment efficiency in China’s banking sector is lower than Indian banking industry, while the potential risks are much higher than India,and the role it plays in economic growth is less important than Indian banking system. (E) In theory, this paper contribute to the research on banking system-economic growth relationship paradigm.When concerning about the the existing literature on the banking system and economic growth studies,most of these studies have ignored the way of economic growth.A lot of these studies are occuring in English literature countries (particularly the United States), and these countries have achieved the transformation of economic growth.As to economic growth-banking system relationshipin developing countries, it is necessary to considerate the way of economic growth, but not limited to the data itself. This article introduces the concept of credit structure(meso level), different from the traditional macro and micro level. After introducing the concept of credit structure,this paper find the structure and system of the banking system is not the key elements of economic growth,while the economic environment(the growth model) play a key role in the function of banking systemAs to the policy-makers,they should change the the envoriment in which banking system work, but should not rigidly adhere to the banking system reform itself.更多还原