A Test of the Controversial Assumptions in the McKinnon-Shaw Hypothesis versus Neo-Structuralist Propositions : An Empirical Test From a Field Survey in the Congo

J. Maswana
{"title":"A Test of the Controversial Assumptions in the McKinnon-Shaw Hypothesis versus Neo-Structuralist Propositions : An Empirical Test From a Field Survey in the Congo","authors":"J. Maswana","doi":"10.18999/FORIDS.25.137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper attempts to shed light on the efficiency/effectiveness issues of informal financial markets and the pattern of portfolio allocation shift in response to change in interest rate, in the process of financial liberalization. The two issues have been both controversial and hotly debated between proponents of the McKinnon-Shaw liberalization and Neo-structuralist economists. To examine whether interest rate changes are associated with the former or the latter view in the Congo we resort to a survey of household portfolio behavior in informal finance. Survey results suggest that informal finance is relatively effective in intermediating funds and providing financial services and access. In addition, the portfolio pattern indicates that households shift resource more from informal loan to deposits than from cash. These results provide some support for the Neostructuralists’argument; rejecting thus the McKinnon-Shaw argument that higher bank interest rates would generally increase investment.","PeriodicalId":341672,"journal":{"name":"Development and Comp Systems","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development and Comp Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18999/FORIDS.25.137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper attempts to shed light on the efficiency/effectiveness issues of informal financial markets and the pattern of portfolio allocation shift in response to change in interest rate, in the process of financial liberalization. The two issues have been both controversial and hotly debated between proponents of the McKinnon-Shaw liberalization and Neo-structuralist economists. To examine whether interest rate changes are associated with the former or the latter view in the Congo we resort to a survey of household portfolio behavior in informal finance. Survey results suggest that informal finance is relatively effective in intermediating funds and providing financial services and access. In addition, the portfolio pattern indicates that households shift resource more from informal loan to deposits than from cash. These results provide some support for the Neostructuralists’argument; rejecting thus the McKinnon-Shaw argument that higher bank interest rates would generally increase investment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
麦金农-肖假说与新结构主义命题的争议性假设检验:来自刚果实地调查的实证检验
本文试图揭示在金融自由化过程中,非正式金融市场的效率/有效性问题以及投资组合配置模式随利率变化的变化。这两个问题在麦金农-肖自由化的支持者和新结构主义经济学家之间一直存在争议和激烈的争论。为了检验刚果的利率变化是否与前一种观点或后一种观点有关,我们对非正式金融中的家庭投资组合行为进行了调查。调查结果表明,非正规金融在中介资金、提供金融服务和准入方面相对有效。此外,投资组合模式表明,家庭更多地将资源从非正式贷款转移到存款而不是现金。这些结果为新结构主义者的观点提供了一些支持;从而否定了麦金农-肖关于提高银行利率通常会增加投资的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Canaries and Vultures: A Quantitative History of Monetary Mismanagement in Brazil Trade Liberalisation and Poverty in Nepal: A Computable General Equilibrium Micro Simulation Analysis A Test of the Controversial Assumptions in the McKinnon-Shaw Hypothesis versus Neo-Structuralist Propositions : An Empirical Test From a Field Survey in the Congo Slave Redemption When it Takes Time to Redeem Slaves Construction of CPIX Data for Forecasting and Modelling in South Africa
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1