金融失衡视角下宏观审慎政策工具有效性研究——基于119家商业银行的实证分析  

The Validity Test of Macro-Prudential Policy Tools from the Perspective of Financial Imbalances:An Empirical Analysis of 119 Commercial Banks

作　　者：苏明政[1] 徐佳信 张庆君[3] 

机构地区：[1]渤海大学财政金融研究中心,辽宁锦州121013 [2]渤海大学经法学院,辽宁锦州121013 [3]天津财经大学中国滨海金融协同创新中心,天津300222

出　　处：《会计与经济研究》2017年第1期102-116,共15页Accounting and Economics Research

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目(71503025);辽宁省高等学校杰出青年学者成长计划(WJQ2015001)

摘　　要：基于现阶段中国金融失衡的特征,选取目标变量与工具变量,对中国宏观审慎政策工具的有效性进行四类检验。单一工具检验表明:存款准备金率是最整体有效的宏观审慎政策工具;联合工具检验表明:联合工具对影子银行规模、经济周期波动等风险因素有较好的作用,而对信贷扩张的影响较差;异质性检验表明:大银行相对于小银行、东部银行相对于西部银行、国有银行相对于外资银行更有利于政策工具有效性的发挥;非线性检验表明:各政策工具在联合使用时,挤占效应明显降低了政策工具的有效性。Based on the characteristics of China＇s current financial imbalance, this paper chooses the target variables and instrument variables to carry out four types of tests on the effectiveness of China＇s macro-prudential policy instruments. The single instrument test shows that the deposit reserve ratio is the most effective macro-prudential policy tool. The joint instruments test shows that the joint instruments have a better effect on the risk factors such as the shadow bank size and the economic cycle fluctuation but a worse effect on the loan expansion. The heterogeneity test shows that the large banks are more favorable to the effectiveness of the policy tools than the small banks, so as eastern to western and domestic to international. The non-linear tests show that the squeeze effect significantly reduces the effectiveness of policy instruments.

关 键 词：系统性金融风险 金融失衡 宏观审慎政策工具 

分 类 号：F832[经济管理—金融学]