A Comparative Study of Saving Behaviour Between India and China

IF 1.3 Q1 AREA STUDIES Millennial Asia Pub Date : 2022-04-17 DOI:10.1177/09763996221087049

Chandralekha Ghosh, Rimita Hom Chaudhury

引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study attempts to understand the determinants of saving behaviour using the Global Findex micro-database of India and China. Further, this study has also tried to identify the gender gap in saving behaviour for both the countries. Empirical (pooled logistic regression) results suggest that being rich, educated, employed and old favour saving than others. Women are more prone to save informally than men. The main contribution of this article is the analytical comparison between India and China, which demonstrates that in terms of saving Chinese adults are ahead of Indian adults. However, informal saving is more prevalent in India. The gender gap in saving behaviour is higher in China than in India. Our research also discovered that China’s age saving pattern is U-shaped, that is, younger and older are more likely to save than the middle-aged, which contradicts the standard life cycle model whereas this model holds for India.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

印度与中国储蓄行为的比较研究

本研究试图利用印度和中国的全球金融指数微型数据库来了解储蓄行为的决定因素。此外，这项研究还试图确定两国在储蓄行为方面的性别差异。实证(汇集逻辑回归)结果表明，富人、受过教育的人、有工作的人和老年人比其他人更喜欢储蓄。女性比男性更倾向于非正式地存钱。本文的主要贡献是对印度和中国的分析比较，这表明在储蓄方面，中国成年人领先于印度成年人。然而，非正式储蓄在印度更为普遍。中国储蓄行为的性别差异比印度更大。我们的研究还发现，中国的年龄储蓄模式是u型的，即年轻人和老年人比中年人更有可能储蓄，这与标准的生命周期模型相矛盾，而这一模型适用于印度。

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

Millennial Asia AREA STUDIES-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Millennial Asia: An International Journal of Asian Studies is a multidisciplinary, refereed biannual journal of the Association of Asia Scholars (AAS)–an association of the alumni of the Asian Scholarship Foundation (ASF). It aims to encourage multifaceted, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research on Asia, in order to understand its fast changing context as a growth pole of global economy. By providing a forum for Asian scholars situated globally, it promotes dialogue between the global academic community, civil society and policy makers on Asian issues. The journal examines Asia on a regional and comparative basis, emphasizing patterns and tendencies that go beyond national borders and are globally relevant. Modern and contemporary Asia has witnessed dynamic transformations in cultures, societies, economies and political institutions, among others. It confronts issues of collective identity formation, ecological crisis, rapid economic change and resurgence of religion and communal identifies while embracing globalization. An analysis of past experiences can help produce a deeper understanding of contemporary change. In particular, the journal is interested in locating contemporary changes within a historical perspective, through the use of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches. This way, it hopes to promote comparative studies involving Asia’s various regions. The journal brings out both thematic and general issues and the thrust areas are: Asian integration, Asian economies, sociology, culture, politics, governance, security, development issues, arts and literature and any other such issue as the editorial board may deem fit. The core fields include development encompassing agriculture, industry, regional trade, social sectors like health and education and development policy across the region and in specific countries in a comparative perspective.