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.

The Competition between Bank Branches and between State-owned Banks and their Influence on Economic Growth

Does Bank Competition Inhibit the Formation of Zombie Firms?

Bank Fund Reallocation and Economic Growth: Evidence from China

Bank competition and corporate employment: Evidence from the geographic distribution of bank branches in China

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

Banking Structure and Economic Growth: Evidence from China

Bank Competition and Firm Labor Investment Efficiency: Evidence from China

Bank competition and corporate financial asset holdings

Bank Efficiency and Regional Economic Growth: Evidence from China

Banking Structure and Industrial Growth: Evidence from China

The Investigation of the Competitiveness Level of Chinese Commercial Banks: Based on the Empirical Evidence of 16 Listed Commercial Banks from 2010 to 2012

Banking Reform and Locational Strategy of State-Owned Commercial Banks in China: an Empirical Study of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and Bank of China

Foreign entry and bank competition on financial products in China: A model of bank size

Risking or de-risking? The effect of banking competition on large state-owned banks and small and medium-sized enterprise lending: Evidence from China

Does Bank Competition Alleviate Financing Constraints in China? Further Evidence From Listed Firms

A test of competition in Chinese banking

Bank branching deregulation and the credit risk of the regional banking sector: Evidence from city commercial banks in China

Bank Branching Applications and Window Dressing: Evidence on Banks’ Strategic Use of Loan Loss Provisions

Ownership Reform, Foreign Competition, and Efficiency of Chinese Commercial Banks

Financial development and population growth: Evidence from Bank concentration in China 1

Financial development and population growth: Evidence from bank concentration in China