【作者】 付强；

【导师】 史继刚；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 西方经济学， 2012， 硕士

【摘要】 银行改革的目的之一就是要引入竞争,改变我国四大银行长期以来低效率的状态,使银行真正成为我国经济高速发展的润滑剂。因此我国在加入世贸组织之后逐步开放金融市场,引进外资银行,面对外资进入的潜在威胁,四大银行进行了股份制改革,城市商业银行’进行了新设、改组、合并,增强了自身抵抗风险的能力,提高了效率。但是学者们研究发现,自2001年入世之后四大银行、内资银行相比外资银行的效率,差距还是很大的,实证结果显示国有四大银行的技术效率(TE)2均值约为0.45,股份制商业银行的TE均值约为0.85,外资银行的TE均值约为0.95,三类银行在TE上的差距是十分明显的。本文选择利润率作为考察银行效率的指标,使用市场势力作为影响银行利润率的一个关键因素,分别分析影响市场势力和利润率的因素,实证检验市场势力和利润率的相关性,提出改善我国商业银行利润率的建议。彭欢、雷震(2010)曾经研究说明了放松管制条件下——加入世界贸易组织之后(2001-2006年),我国商业银行市场结构的变迁,并在研究市场结构的基础上分析了结构的变化对总资产收益率的影响。笔者在扩大银行样本量的基础上对雷震一文进行继续研究。首先,笔者选择市场势力作为影响银行利润率的一个关键变量,原因在于从影响银行利润率的因素来看,可以分为,外部因素：市场势力、宏观经济运行情况、政策因素；内部因素：银行规模、银行资产的安全性、盈利性、资产结构、业务创新能力、管理水平、治理结构。内部因素作用的结果使得每个银行拥有自己的市场势力,而政策的作用结果往往是银行市场势力形成的历史原因,经济运行状况是市场势力的外生变量。“市场势力”可以用一个叫勒纳指数LI=P-MC/P的变量来描述,意思就是控制价格的能力,无论是买方还是卖方,如果LI很小,价格P和边际成本MC非常接近,那么市场上的一方控制价格的能力就非常弱,就越接近完全竞争市场,市场竞争程度就很高,市场势力就很小；反之,如果LI很大,意即P和MC的差距很大,市场上的一方操纵价格的能力就很强,就越接近完全垄断市场,市场竞争程度就越低,市场势力就越大。根据MK(Monti,Klein)的“非完全竞争模型”分别得到存贷款市场的勒纳指数。在前文基础上,笔者寻找影响市场势力的主要因素。影响市场势力的因素包括市场集中度、进入和退出壁垒、产品差异化、市场需求价格弹性、市场需求增长率、短期成本结构6个方面。市场集中度可以用赫芬达尔指数HHI来衡量,而中国商业银行的进入和退出壁垒可以分为经济性壁垒和政策性壁垒两类,其中经济性壁垒包括绝对成本、规模经济、产品差异和特殊资源。政策性壁垒主要表现在商业银行市场的准入条件上。学者研究证明,在我国,两类壁垒的最主要方面还是政策性壁垒。在2001-2010年间,我国商业银行业面临的政策的大的方面是没有改变的,基调一直是引入外资银行,增强竞争,改善四大银行的效率,组建地方商业银行等措施。在我国,由于目前商业银行和证券业的分业经营,产品的同质化倾向是很严重的,至少在2001-2010年间,可以认为我国商业银行市场的产品差异化虽然在一定程度上形成了银行的市场势力,但是并不是影响市场势力的主要因素,在后文的计量模型中可以暂时不予考虑。市场需求增长率可以分别从存款和贷款的增长率两个方面加以描述,对于真实需求的测量是很困难的,而实际的存贷款只是一个发生额,但是可以以存贷款的增长率近似替代存贷款需求的增长率。在市场需求价格弹性方面,由于我国居民的储蓄观念是十分强烈的,个人理财观虽然在逐步形成,但还不强,贷款的需求是十分旺盛的,民间的高利贷现象屡禁不止,基于这些前提,可以合理认为我国的存贷款市场需求价格弹性接近于“刚性”。而短期成本结构无法量化,因此本文对我国商业银行市场势力的影响因素主要从市场集中度、存款和贷款增长率三个方面来进行描述。在BankScope中,评价商业银行利润率的指标有很多种,都是从利润率的某个角度关注企业的经营状况,或费用,或收入,或利润,或红利,但是大多数的指标都不能比较综合地反应企业的现实,而ROAA和ROAE两个指标分别从资产和权益两个角度考察了企业的净利润的水平,这两个指标是包含了费用,收入和利润三个方面的综合指标,同时也反应了资产的获利能力,投资的回报率,虽然不能反应红利水平,但是一个企业的红利不仅跟经营状况有关,还跟当期会计年度的分配政策相关,并非一个独立变量,从这个角度而言,ROAA和ROAE是可以综合反应企业利润率的良好指标,因此本文选用这二者作为考察我国商业银行利润率的变量。本文分析银行的市场势力和利润率的关系,首先从整个商业银行市场来考察,实证结果显示存贷款市场势力的降低都会带来利润率的提升,而且贷款市场的相关系数更大,表明如果对目前的贷款市场进行改革,在利润率的提升方面,效果要好于存款市场。其原因在于我国贷款市场的信贷配额制度,而存款市场的竞争是很激烈的,用边际递减规则很容易推出短期内贷款市场开放的效果是显著的。在研究市场势力和利润率关系的模型基础上,笔者再把我国银行分为四大和非四大两类,计量结果显示在入世后的10年里,四大银行对我国商业银行业利润率提升的贡献远大于其他股份制银行、外资银行等,同时联系到对比四大银行和外资银行、股份制商业银行利润率的结果,目前四大银行的利润率还比较低,那么四大银行利润率提升的空间还很大,继续深化对四大银行的改革还会使我国商业银行的利润率得到进一步升华。最后,本文根据前文所述的分析和实证,得出以下研究结论：第一,我国的市场结构处于竞争Ⅰ型,这个结论是本文与其他学者看法最大的不同。首先,因为过去研究我国商业银行竞争问题的时候,很多学者所选择的样本量不足,仅仅10多20来家,虽然四大银行确实在存贷款这些传统市场上占有绝对的地位,但是他们忽略了地区经济发展的差异,也忽略了银行的差异化竞争策略。第二,在贷款市场上,我国的银行都有一定的市场控制能力,而在存款市场上则存在一定的规模不经济现象。10年来,贷款市场的勒纳指数都为正,而存款市场的勒纳指数从05年开始变为负值。究其原因有二,我国的贷款实行的是信贷配额制,相对于超额的资金需求而言,贷款是一种稀缺资源。第二方面,存款市场勒纳指数05年开始变为负值,有两种可能,一是价格指数降低了,二是银行的边际成本变高了。观察勒纳指数的计算方法和实际可知,存款市场存在规模不经济现象。第三,10年来,我国商业银行的利润率得到大幅提升。以ROAA表示的银行利润率来看,我国商业银行的利润率总体上是不断提升的,但是四大银行和其他股份制商业银行表现出来的时间路径是两种完全不同的轨迹。一方面,四大银行在前4年利润率都不高,而其他的股份制商业银行和地方城市商业银行,利润率比较高；但是在05年之后四大银行陆续进行了股份制改革,利润率得到了快速的提升,在近几年其他银行利润率徘徊不前的情况下,四大银行的利润率却如日中天般的提升。第四,在我国,入世后竞争的提升促进了利润率的改善,同时证明了我国商业银行利润率的改进主要来自于四大行自身的改革。在分析竞争和利润率关系的模型上,我们加以改进,把银行粗略分成四大银行和其他银行两类,对比分类前后的结果,在整个银行业市场上,证明四大银行市场势力改变是影响整个银行业利润率的主要方面。综上所述,本文提出了四条建议：(1)更加关注对商业银行业民族资本的培养,降低对引进外资的热度；(2)提高四大银行的权益比率,增强非四大银行的资产的安全性；(3)逐步开放贷款市场和新的银行业务,进行差异化竞争,进一步提高整个行业的竞争,降低银行的市场势力；(4)提升银行管理水平,平衡长期战略行为的收益和成本,提高利润率。更多还原

【Abstract】 One of the purposes of banking reform is to introduce competition, change the long-time low efficiency of China’s "Big Four", make the banks really become lubricant for China’s rapid economic development. So after the entry into the WTO China gradually opens financial market, introduces foreign capital banks, Facing the potential threat of foreign capital, the "Big Four" carried out the stock system reform, city commercial banks performed the new set, reorganization, merger to enhance their enhance their risk resistance capacity, and improve efficiency. But there is a large gap on efficiency after2001between the "Big Four", domestic Banks and foreign capital banks according to scholars’study. The result shows that the average technical efficiency (TE) of the "Big Four" was0.45, while the Joint stock commercial Banks was0.85, the foreign capital banks was0.95, the gap is very obvious. This article chooses profit rate to measure bank efficiency, uses market power as a key affecting bank profits’factor, analyzes the factors affecting market power and profit rate, tests the correlation between market power and profit rate by empirical way, and propounds suggestions to promote the efficiency.PengHuan, LeiZhen (2010) have ever studied the market structure changes of our commercial banks under deregulation condition (after the entry into WTO,2001-2006), and analyzed the structure change influence on ROA based on the study of market structure. This article is a continue study about Lei’s by expanding the bank sample size.First, the author chooses market power as a key variable affecting bank efficiency, the reason is that there are two kinds of factors affecting bank efficiency, which can be divided into, external factors:market power, macro economy, policy factor; Internal factors:the bank size, bank assets of safety and profitability and asset structure, business innovation ability, and the management level, the management structure. Internal factors make each bank have its own market forces, and policy is often a historical reason to market power, while macro economy is an exogenous variable. The "market force" can use Lerner Index to describe, meaning the ability to control prices, the buyer or the seller, if LI is very small, the P and MC is close, so the market participants’market ability of price control is very weak, and the market structure is close to completely competitive market, competition is very high, market forces are; Conversely, if LI is big, P and MC is far, ability of price control is strong, it’s close to completely monopoly market, market competition is very low, the greater the market power is. we can calculate the Lerner Index on deposit and loan market according to MK’s (Monti, Klein)"incomplete competition model".Based on the above, the author finds the main factors affecting the market force. The factors include market concentration, entry and exit barriers, product differentiation, market demand price elasticity, market demand growth, short-term cost structure. Market concentration can use HHI to measure it, and China’s bank entry and exit barriers can be divided into economic barriers and policy barriers, economic barriers include absolute cost, scale economy, product differences and special resources. Policy barriers mainly display in banking market access conditions. Scholars’ research proves that the main barriers are policy barriers between the two. Among2001-2010years, the main policy our banking industry facing didn’t change, it always was introduction foreign Banks, increasing competition and improving the efficiency of the Big Four, establishing local commercial banks and so on. In our country, because banks and securities are separated operation, the product homogeneity tendency is serious, at least among2001-2010, we can consider that product differentiation form some market force in China’s banking industry market, but it’s not the major factor, so it wasn’t considered in the econometric model in this article temporarily.The market demand growth rates can be described on two aspects of saving and loan, for measuring the real demand is very difficult, and the actual saving and loan is just an amount incurred, but we can replace demand growth rates with saving and loan growth rates. About the market demand price elasticity, because our country’s "savings" concept is very strong, and personal finance concept is forming gradually, but it’s not strong, loan demand is very strong, the usury is long-standing, so it’s reasonable to consider that our saving and loan market demand price elasticity is close to "rigid". Short-term cost structure is unable to quantified, so this paper describe the main factors affecting our bank market power on three aspects:market concentration, saving and loan growth rate.In BankScope, there are a lot of indexes to describe profits rate of commercial bank, from a certain profits rate point of view on the management of the enterprise, or expenses, or income, or profits, or dividends, but most of the indexes can not reflect the reality of enterprise comprehensively, while ROAA and ROAE are two comprehensive indexes include cost, revenue and profit separately from assets and the owner’s equity to investigate the enterprise’net profit, They also reflect the profitability of assets, rate of return on investment, although can not reflect dividend level, but the bonus is not only relevant to enterprise management condition, but also itself relates to distribution policy, not an independent variables, from this aspect, ROAA and ROAE are more comprehensive indexes, so is the reason for this paper to choose them. This paper analyzes the relationship between market power and profit rate, first we investigate the whole banking industry, the evidence shows that the lower market forces it is, the higher efficiency of the bank it is, and the correlation coefficients of loan market is bigger, show that if we reform the current loan market, the effect is better than deposit market. Because our country loan market implements credit quota system, and the competition is very intense in deposit market, we can easily conclude that in a short term the effect of opening loan market is significant with marginal decline rule. Based on the model of market power and profit rate relationship, the author sort the Banks in China into Big Four and not Big Four, the empirical results show that during the10years after the entry into WTO the Big Four make a larger contribution on improving banking industry efficiency than joint-stock Banks, Foreign Banks etc., but the Big Four’s efficiency are still low now, so there is plenty of room for improvement, and continue to deepen reforming the Big Four will evaluate the efficiency of our banking industry.更多还原