经济结构决定金融结构外文文献翻译中英文最新Word格式文档下载.docx

1、AbstractIn this paper, we examine the relationship between the structure of the real economy and a countrys financial system. We consider whether the development of the real economic structure can predict the direction of evolution of a countrys financial structure. Using data for 108 countries, we

2、find a significant relationship between real economic structure and financial structure. Next, we exploit shocks to the economies in India, Finland and Sweden, and South Korea and show that changes in the economic structure of a country influence the evolution of its financial system. This suggests

3、that financial institutions and capital markets change in response to the structure of industries.Keywords：Financial system，Economic structureIntroductionThe structures of financial systems vary among industrial and developing countries. In some countries, financial systems are predominantly bank-ba

4、sed, while in others they are dominated by capital markets. Only fragmented theories exist in the literature that explain the prevailing differences in country financial structures, which are defined as the mix of financial markets, institutions, instruments, and contracts that prescribe how financi

5、al activities are organized at a particular date.The existing studies explain the prevailing differences in financial structures using legal origin and protection, politics, history, and culture as factors. This paper considers the link between the real economic structure and the financial system of

6、 a country. Such a relationship is influenced by the funding sources for corporate investment that differ depending on firm and project characteristics （Allen, 1993;Boot and Thakor, 1997;Allen and Gale, 1999）. Consistent with this theory, banks are more appropriate for the financing of traditional a

7、sset-intensive industries, whereas capital markets favour innovative and risky projects. One implication of this theory is that the real economic structure of a country, whether it is asset intensive or service oriented, could determine its financial structure. For instance, financial systems in cou

8、ntries such as Germany and Japan would remain bank-based as long as their economies are dominated by manufacturing industries. Contrastingly, the financial system in the United States will continue to be market-oriented as long as service and highly innovative companies constitute a large share of t

9、he economy. Consequently, the financial systems of the United States, Germany, or Japan will remain at polar extremes because of their economic structures even though the countries are at a similar stage of development.Robinson （1952）argues that financial intermediaries and markets emerge when requi

10、red by industries. Consequently, intermediaries and markets appear in response to economic structure. The idea that the form of financing, and thus the countrys financial structure, depends on the type of activity that firms engage in has not yet been directly addressed in the literature. To provide

11、 evidence of the hypothesis that structure and changes in the real economy determine the direction of evolution of a countrys financial system, we first must distinguish the different financial structures across countries. However, although recent attention has shifted to a more systematic classific

12、ation of financial systems, the literature provides only very broad measures and definitions for classification. Consistent with the literature this study classifies a countrys financial system as either bank-based （the German or Japanese model） or market-based （the Anglo-Saxon model）. In the bank-b

13、ased financial system, financial intermediaries play an important role by mobilising savings, allocating credit, and facilitating the hedging, pooling, and pricing of risks. In the market-based financial system, capital markets are the main channels of finance in the economy （Allen and Gale, 2000）.O

14、ur theory builds onRajan and Zingales （2003a）who note that bank-based systems tend to have a comparative advantage in financing fixed-asset-intensive firms rather than high technology research and development-based firms.argue that fixed-asset-intensive firms are typically more traditional and well

15、understood, and the borrower has the collateral to entice fresh lenders if the existing ones prove overly demanding. As perRajan and Zingales （2003a）, loans are well collateralised by physical assets, and therefore are liquid; hence, the concentration of information in the system will not be a barri

16、er to the financing of these assets. Conversely, the authors argue that market-based systems will have a comparative advantage in financing knowledge industries withintangible assets.Consequently, we suggest that countries with a majority of physical-asset-intensive firms, depending on external fina

17、nce, will be more likely to possess a bank-oriented financial system. However, capital markets should develop more effectively in countries with firms that are based on knowledge and intangible assets. We test this hypothesis by identifying fixed-asset-intensive firms within the economic sector defi

18、ned as industry by the standard classification system for economic activity. Conversely, in this study the service sector acts as a proxy for knowledge and intangible asset firms. The relative importance of the two types of firms in an economy will be represented by the relative volume of activity o

19、f the two different economic sectors. The standard system of classification for economic activity includes a third sector, agriculture. We classify agriculture as a physical-asset-intensive industry because land and agricultural machinery may be used as collateral and, therefore, we assume that firm

20、s in the agricultural sector will prefer bank financing over capital markets.We first present some historical evidence showing the nexus between real economic structure and financial system. In order to test our outlined hypothesis, we use a panel data set for 108 countries and employ both the panel

21、 OLS and a two-stepgeneralised-method-of-moments（GMM） system. Additionally, we investigate the robustness of the results by introducing different additional control variables and testing the heterogenous effects. The results suggest that there is a negative and significant relationship between a cou

22、ntrys economic structure （industry versus service sector） and financial system structure （stock market versus banking sector）. In economies where the service sector carries more weight economically than industry and agriculture, the country tends to have a market-based financial system. In contrast,

23、 a bank-based financial system is more likely to emerge in economies with many fixed-asset-intensive firms.Next, we conduct event studies using thetreatment effectestimation to isolate the endogeneity concerns. We analyse different types of exogenous shock to the structure of the real economy and it

24、s impact on financial structure. We employ three events that changed the economic structures of the countries and further investigate their impact on the financial structure using adifference-in-differencestrategy. The first event is Indias structural reforms in 1991 as a positive shock to the count

25、rys economy; the second one is the demise of the Soviet Union as a negative shock to the economy of Finland and Sweden; the third one is the economic reforms in the 1980s and early 1990s in South Korea. In India and South Korea we find that after the structural reforms of the economies, the service

26、sector grew in relative terms and the stock markets in both countries experienced significantly faster growth than their banking systems, compared to the control countries. In Finland and Sweden we document that following the negative shock the service sector gained in relative importance, which was

27、 followed by the faster growth of the equity market in comparison to the banking system. Overall, the results of the three different event studies confirm our hypothesis that the relative importance of financial intermediaries and markets is determined by the industry needs of a country.The findings

28、 of this study are interesting from a regulatory perspective and lend insight into the development of financial structures worldwide. The main policy implications from this study are that financial structures should be evaluated in terms of whether they meet the requirements of the real economy and

29、industries. Furthermore the financial structure cannot be changed as long as the economic structure does not change. The results provide insight into the reasons for limited capital markets growth in developing countries despite official stimulation efforts from governments and multilateral organisa

30、tions （Schmukler et al., 2007）. According to our study of many developing countries, as long as economies remain relatively agriculture- and industry-oriented, any government effort to create or further develop a capital market is likely to not to be very successful. Additionally, any regulation tha

31、t attempts to force a change in the financial system may result in a discrepancy in the economic and financial structure. Therefore, such efforts or regulations may introduce financial constraints that can further stall economic growth because financial structure influences output levels and economi

32、c growth （Levine and Zervos, 1998;Luintel et al., 2008）.The real economy and finance nexusA number of explanations for financial structure exist in the literature; however, none are able to provide a comprehensive account of the observations. The first explanation is based on legal origin and investor protection.Levine （1997）builds on the work ofLa Porta et al. （1997,1998）; henceforth LLSV） stating that legal systems originate from a limited number of legal traditions: