Will Financial Liberalization Help China to Invest More Efficiently? Evidence from China’s Saving and Investment from 1993 to 2017

Hang Cheng
{"title":"Will Financial Liberalization Help China to Invest More Efficiently? Evidence from China’s Saving and Investment from 1993 to 2017","authors":"Hang Cheng","doi":"10.1080/10971475.2021.1930298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract China has enjoyed high saving and high investment ratios by international standards. However, mainstream economists argue that China suffers from inefficient investment due to excessive state interventions. The mainstream argument is in conflict with the observed high output-capital ratios and rates of return on capital in China before 2008. China’s investment efficiency has deteriorated since 2008 despite the progress of financial liberalization. In this essay, we used provincial-level panel data from 1993 to 2017 and the technique of General Method of Moments to examine how China’s saving and investment respond to output-capital ratio, gross profit share, and real interest rate. We find that output-capital ratio has positive effects on saving and investment in all three periods (1993–2000, 2001–2008, 2009–2017); gross profit share has positive effects on saving; but gross profit share has negative and significant impact on investment for the period 2009–2017. We find that real interest rate has significant and negative impact on China’s saving for the period 1993–2000, a result that is inconsistent with the neoclassical theory of saving. On the other hand, real interest rate has a significant and negative impact on investment and a significant and positive impact on saving for the period 2009–2017, consistent with what should happen in a liberalized financial market according to neoclassical economics. These findings suggest that China’s financial market may have become sufficiently liberalized to induce the “correct” behavior from businesses and households but the “correct” behavior has not yet led to improvement in China’s investment efficiency.","PeriodicalId":22382,"journal":{"name":"The Chinese Economy","volume":"43 1","pages":"67 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Chinese Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10971475.2021.1930298","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract China has enjoyed high saving and high investment ratios by international standards. However, mainstream economists argue that China suffers from inefficient investment due to excessive state interventions. The mainstream argument is in conflict with the observed high output-capital ratios and rates of return on capital in China before 2008. China’s investment efficiency has deteriorated since 2008 despite the progress of financial liberalization. In this essay, we used provincial-level panel data from 1993 to 2017 and the technique of General Method of Moments to examine how China’s saving and investment respond to output-capital ratio, gross profit share, and real interest rate. We find that output-capital ratio has positive effects on saving and investment in all three periods (1993–2000, 2001–2008, 2009–2017); gross profit share has positive effects on saving; but gross profit share has negative and significant impact on investment for the period 2009–2017. We find that real interest rate has significant and negative impact on China’s saving for the period 1993–2000, a result that is inconsistent with the neoclassical theory of saving. On the other hand, real interest rate has a significant and negative impact on investment and a significant and positive impact on saving for the period 2009–2017, consistent with what should happen in a liberalized financial market according to neoclassical economics. These findings suggest that China’s financial market may have become sufficiently liberalized to induce the “correct” behavior from businesses and households but the “correct” behavior has not yet led to improvement in China’s investment efficiency.
金融自由化会帮助中国提高投资效率吗?来自1993 - 2017年中国储蓄和投资的证据
按国际标准衡量,中国具有高储蓄、高投资的特点。然而,主流经济学家认为,由于过度的国家干预,中国的投资效率低下。主流观点与观察到的2008年前中国高产出资本比率和资本回报率存在冲突。自2008年以来,尽管金融自由化取得了进展,但中国的投资效率却有所恶化。本文采用1993 - 2017年的省级面板数据,运用一般矩量法分析了中国储蓄和投资对产出资本比、毛利占比和实际利率的响应。研究发现,在1993-2000年、2001-2008年、2009-2017年三个时期,资本产出比对储蓄和投资均有正向影响;毛利份额对储蓄有正向影响;但毛利份额对2009-2017年期间的投资有负的显著影响。研究发现,1993-2000年期间,实际利率对中国储蓄有显著的负向影响,这与新古典主义储蓄理论不一致。另一方面,2009-2017年期间,实际利率对投资有显著的负面影响,对储蓄有显著的积极影响,这与新古典经济学认为自由化金融市场应该发生的情况一致。这些发现表明,中国的金融市场可能已经足够自由化,可以诱导企业和家庭的“正确”行为,但“正确”行为尚未导致中国投资效率的提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信