کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
5047807 | 1370919 | 2012 | 16 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |

This paper examines the impact of recent financial reforms in China on the financing constraints and investment of publicly-listed Chinese firms. Two continuous indices are constructed to measure the evolution and intensity of financial reforms: a financial liberalization index and a capital control index. Dynamic panel GMM method is used to estimate firms' financing constraints in an Euler-equation investment model. Based on panel data of listed firms for 1996-2007, we find that large firms face no credit constraints and smaller firms display significant constraints. However, the sensitivity of large firms' investment to their cash holdings is heightened as more financial reforms take place. It appears that reforms that gradually eliminate preferential treatments to large firms, primarily state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in China, have subjected these firms' investment decisions to stricter market-based discipline and therefore raised their financing constraints. No significant change in the financing constraint is detected for smaller firms in China. This is interpreted as financial reform in China has not been substantial enough for its benefits to reach smaller firms.
⺠The impact of recent financial liberalization in China on the financing constraints and investment of Chinese firms. ⺠Two continuous indices are constructed to measure the evolution and intensity of financial reforms ⺠Dynamic panel GMM method is used to estimate firms' financing constraints in an Euler-equation investment model. ⺠While smaller firms face significant financing constraints than larger firms, financial liberalization has raised the financing constraints for the latter and failed to relieve the constraints for the former. ⺠Financial reforms in China have subjected larger firms to greater market discipline but the reforms have not been profound enough to benefit smaller firms.
Journal: China Economic Review - Volume 23, Issue 2, June 2012, Pages 482-497