Abstract:While China has seen rapid economic growth over the last three decades, many studies document a negative correlation between traditional measurements of banking development and economic growth in China. Among many efforts to explain the low efficiency of Chinese banking sector, two arguments focus on the dominance of the four big state-owned banks but they emphasize different facets of the “Big Four.” The ownership-structure view argues that the state ownership of the largest banks and corresponding government interventions in capital allocation should be responsible for the bad performance of the banking sector. The size-structure view states that it is the improper size structure of the banking sector that leads to its low efficiency. This paper aims to empirically disentangle these two different explanations. With data on the banking sector and 28 manufacturing sectors in 30 provinces of mainland China over the period 1999-2007, this paper investigates the differential effects of banking structure on the growth rates of different industries. In order to identify the channel through which banking structure affects industrial growth, the paper constructs two interaction variables: interaction between labor intensity of each industry and banking structure at each province, interaction between the share of non-state-owned firms and banking structure. To capture the purely technological feature of each industry, the paper uses the labor-capital ratio of each U.S. manufacturing sector as a proxy for labor intensity of the corresponding Chinese manufacturing industry. We find that more labor-intensive industries grow faster than more capital-intensive industries in provinces with more active small banks, compared to provinces with more dominant Big Four branches. These results are robust to alternative measures of labor intensity. But the interaction variable used to capture the ownership-structure view is not significant in all the regressions. Thus the results are consistent with the size-structure view while not support the ownership-structure argument.

An Empirical Study of Financial Structure and E- conomic Growth in East Asia

An Empirical Study of the Effects of Capital Formation and Flow on the Economy of the Eastern Region of China

Financial Scale, Financial Structure and Economic Growth -Empirical Research on Provincial Panel Data

Education, Human Capital And Regional Economic Differentials: An Empirical Test Using China'S Provincial Panel Data

Education,Human Capital and Regional Economic Differentials

Institutional Change,Financial Structure and Economic Growth——The Empirical Studies Based on China

Stock market development and economic growth: Empirical evidence from China

Empirical Study on the Relation between Financial Assets Structure and Economic Growth——Based on the Data of Zhejiang Province

Banking Structure and Industrial Growth: Evidence from China

Banking Structure and Economic Growth: Evidence from China

The Relationship Between Industrial Structure and Economic Growth in China— An Empirical Study Based on Panel Data

Banking Structure and Economic Growth:Evidence from Chinese Provincial Panel Data

Relationships Between Financial Development and Economic Growth from the Incomplete Contract Perspective

Financial Structure and Capital Allocation Efficiency: An Empirical Analysis of China from 2005–2018

The Impacts on Economic Growth of Financial Integration

Social Capital,Institution and Economic Growth:Based on Chinese Provincial-level Panel Data

Financial Structure, Industrial Structure, and Economic Development: A New Structural Economics Perspective

Empirics on influencing mechanisms among energy, finance, trade, environment, and economic growth: a heterogeneous dynamic panel data analysis of China

Financial Development and Economic Growth: an Analysis Based on Provincial Panel Data

An Empirical Study on the Determinants of Capital Structures of Chinese Publicly Listed Companies

Structural Change and Economic Growth in China