Paper Banca China

7/25/2019 Paper Banca China

1/16

EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch252(2016)280295

ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect

European

Journal

of

Operational

Research

journalhomepage:www.elsevier.com/locate/ejor

Innovative

Applications

of

O.R.

Evaluating

the

performance

of

Chinese

commercial

banks:

A

comparative

analysis

of

different

types

of

banks

YizheDonga, MichaelFirthb,, WenxuanHouc, WeiweiYangd

aTheSchoolofManagementandBusiness,AberystwythUniversity,Aberystwyth,Wales,UnitedKingdombDepartmentofFinanceandInsurance,LingnanUniversity,TuenMun,NT,HongKongcTheBusinessSchool,UniversityofEdinburgh,Edinburgh,Scotland,UnitedKingdomdDerbyBusinessSchool,UniversityofDerby,Derbyshire,England,UnitedKingdom

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory:

Received26August2014

Accepted18December2015

Availableonline24December2015

Keywords:

Finance

Efficiency

Stochasticfrontieranalysis

Shadowreturnonequity

Chinesebanking

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

This

paper

examines

the

cost

and

profit

efficiency

of

four

types

of

Chinese

commercial

banks

over

the

pe-

riod

from

2002

to

2013.

We

find

that

the

cost

and

profit

efficiencies

improved

across

all

types

of

Chinese

domestic

banks

in

general

and

the

banks

are

more

profit-efficient

than

cost

efficient.

Foreign

banks

are

the

most

cost

efficient

but

the

least

profit

efficient.

The

profit

efficiency

gap

between

foreign

banks

and

domestic

banks

has

widened

after

the

World

Trade

Organization

transition

period

(20072013).

Owner-

ship

structure,

market

competition,

bank

size,

and

listing

status

are

the

main

determinants

of

the

effi-

ciency

of

Chinese

banks.

We

also

find

a

causal

relationship

between

efficiency

and

SROE

by

using

the

panel

auto

regression

method.

The

evidence

from

the

shadow

return

on

equity

(SROE)

suggests

that

pol-

icy

makers

should

be

cautious

of

the

adjustment

costs

imposed

by

the

recapitalization

process,

which

offsets

the

efficiency

gains.

2016

Elsevier

B.V.

All

rights

reserved.

1.

Introduction

Chinasbanking sectorhasgrabbed theattentionof interna-

tional investors and the financial media in recentyears thanks

to the opening up of the banking market after China joined

theWorldTradeOrganization(WTO)in2001andtheenormous

stridesmadeinbankingreformandderegulationinthepast15

years. In many regards, Chinese banks seem to have been im-

munetotherecentglobalbankingepidemicduetotheirclosed

capitalaccountsand insulatedbankingsector thatprimarilyre-

liesontraditionalbankingbusinessthatisnotexposedtorisky

and complex financial instruments. However, there are linger-

ingconcernsabout the fragilityof theChinesebankingsystem.

Thecloselinkbetweenstated-ownedcommercialbanks(SOCBs)

andstate-ownedenterprises(SOEs)increasesthenumberofnon-performingloans forthesebanksandraisesconcernsaboutthe

safetyandsoundnessoftheChinesebankingsector.Inlightofthis,

theChinesegovernmenthasimplementedaseriesofreformsto

transformstate-ownedbanksfromstate-dominatedbureaucracies

WethankshelpfulcommentsbytheEditor(LorenzoPeccati),twoanonymous

reviewers,SubhashRay,andZhenyuWu.Firthacknowledgesthesupportofagrant

fromtheHKSARGovernment(GRFLU340412). Correspondingauthor.Tel.:+85226168950;fax:+85224621073.

E-mailaddresses:[email protected](Y.Dong),[email protected](M.Firth),

[email protected](W.Hou),[email protected](W.Yang).

intomodernmarket-orientedbankinginstitutions.Thereformsin-cluderemovingthecreditceilingondepositsandloans,disposing

ofSOCBsnon-performingloans,recapitalizingtheSOCBs,encour-

agingbankstoseekalistingonthestockexchange,introducing

managementincentivesbasedonefficiencymeasures,andintro-

ducingforeignstrategicinvestors.Whilethesereformshavehada

positiveimpactontheSOCBs,manyoftheproblemswithstate-

ownedbanksarenotyet fullyresolved.Thebanksremainrela-

tivelyundercapitalized,havehighbad-loanratios,weakcorporate

governance,andfailtoallocateresourcesefficiently(Allen,Qian,&

Qian,2005;Jiang,Yao&Zhang,2009;Lin&Zhang,2009).

Many medium and small-sized commercial banks, most no-

tably city commercial banks (CCBs), have emerged and devel-

opedrapidly inthepastdecade.UnliketheSOCBs,thesenewly

established banks typically have a lower level of state owner-shipandtheirshareholdersincludelocalgovernment,SOEs,pri-

vateenterprises,foreignstrategicinvestors,andwealthyindivid-

uals. This diversified ownership structure means that CCBs can

raisefundsfromvariouschannelsoutsideofthestatesystemand

theyare fullyresponsible fortheirown lendingpolicies.Conse-

quently,theirloanportfoliostendtobemuchstrongerthanthose

ofthebigstate-ownedbanks.Inaddition,themediumandsmall-

sizedcommercialbankshaveplayedaveryimportantroleinthe

developmentoffinancialmarketsandtheeconomy inChina. In

particular,theyareheavilyinvolvedinthefinancingofsmalland

medium-sizedenterprises(SMEs),anareathatwillbeakeydriver

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038

0377-2217/ 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://www.sciencedirect.com/http://www.sciencedirect.com/http://www.sciencedirect.com/http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ejorhttp://www.elsevier.com/locate/ejormailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038&domain=pdfhttp://www.elsevier.com/locate/ejorhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.038


2/16


3/16


4/16


5/16


6/16
http://www.cei.gov.cn/


7/16

286 Y.Dongetal./EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch252(2016)280295

vastmajorityoftheresidualvariationisduetocostinefficiencyef-

fectsandstronglysupportstheuseofthestochasticfrontiermodel

ratherthanthestandardOrdinaryLeastSquares(OLS)model.

Table1showstheestimationresultsforthecostandprofitef-

ficiencylevelsforthefullsampleperiodaswellasforthethree

subperiods.Theoverallcostefficiencylevelof0.697suggeststhat,

onaverage,thesampledbankscouldpotentiallyreducetheirinput

costsbyabout30percentbyusingtheirinputsmoreefficiently,

without

changing

their

output

levels.

Similarly,

the

overall

profit

efficiencylevelof0.685suggeststhat,onaverage,bankscouldim-

provetheirprofitsby31.5percenttomatchtheperformanceofthe

bestpractice bank23.

Toinvestigatetheimpactofthebankingsectoropennesspol-

icythatbeganafterChinasaccessiontotheWTOandtherecent

globalfinancialcrisisontheperformanceofChinesebanks,wedi-

videourfullsampleperiodintothreesubperiods,WTOtransi-

tion(20022006),post-WTOtransition(20072009),24andpost-

financialcrisis(20102013).TheresultspresentedinTable1show

that both the costand profitefficiency scores, onaverage, im-

provedoverthesampleperiod.Wealsousethenon-parametric

WilcoxonMannWhitney25teststoexaminetheefficiencydiffer-

encesacrossthetransition,post-transition,andpost-financialcri-

sisperiods.The resultsof the tests confirm that theboth cost

and profit efficiency levels for Chinese banks during the post-

transitionperiodarestatisticallysignificantlyhigherthanduring

thetransitionperiodandthecostandprofitefficiencylevelsinthe

post-financialcrisisperiodarestatisticallysignificantlyhigherthan

during the pre-financial crisis period, at the 5 percent levelof

significance. The results imply that the full opening up of the

bankingsectorhashadapositiveeffectonChinesebanksper-

formanceandthe2008financialcrisisdidnothaveasignificant

impactontheChinesebankingsector.Theseimprovementsinef-

ficiencymaybeduetothemeasurestakenintherecentbanking

reforms,suchasthewritingoff ofalargenumberoftoxicassets,

recapitalization,corporategovernanceimprovements,riskmanage-

ment improvement26, and the introduction of foreign strategic

investors.

5.2.Efficiencybasedonownershipdifferences

TheChinesebankingsectorcanbedividedintofourmajorcat-

egories,namelySOCBs,JSCBs,CCBs,andforeignbanks(FBs).Al-

thoughthesebanksalloperate inthesamemarket,eachgroup

hasdistinctownershipstructuresandmarketsegmentation,and

facesadifferentsetofregulations.Inthelightofthisunevenand

varying regulatoryenvironment,weexpect tofindperformance

23Inordertochecktherobustnessofourresults,wealsouseanSFAmodelwith

analternativespecificationofoutputs(thevalue-addedapproach)toestimateboth

costandprofitefficiencies.Thevalue-addedapproachfocusesontheintermediation

activitiesofbanksbutsuggeststhatdepositsshouldalsobeconsideredasanout-

put

since

they

constitute

elements

on

which

customers

bear

opportunity

costs

and

areinvolvedinthecreationofaddedvalue(seeBergerandHumphrey(1997)for

amoredetaileddiscussion).Themeancostefficiencyandprofitefficiencyobtained

fromthevalue-addedapproachare4.6and13percentlowerthantheintermedia-

tionapproach.Butthetrendsofefficiencylevelsobtainedfromthetwoapproaches

are

broadly

similar

over

time.

The

Spearman

rank

correlations

between

them

are

74.12percentforcostefficiencyand81.47percentforprofitefficiency,respectively.24ChinajoinedtheWTOin2001,buttheopeningupofthefinancialmarkethas

beengradualandcautious.AccordingtoherWTOcommitments,Chinawasre-

quiredtograduallyopenupitsbankingsectorbyremovingregulatoryobstacles

overafive-yeartransitionperiod(20022006).Sincetheendofthistransitionpe-

riod,theChinesebankingsectorhasbeenfullyopentoforeigncompetitors.25TheWilcoxonMannWhitneytestisbasedoncomparisonsoftheranksrather

thantheaverages.26Thequalityofloansissignificantlyimprovedoverthesampleperiods.Accord-

ingtotheCBRC,thenon-performingloanratioofcommercialbanksdecreaseddra-

maticallyfrom17.6percentin2003to6.7percentin2007andfurtherdecreased

to

1.5

percent

in

2013.

Fig.1.Averagecostefficiencybybanktype.

variationsbothacrossthegroupsofbanksandovertime.Weex-

plainthesevariationsbelow.

Themeanvaluesof thecostandprofitefficiencyscores,ac-

cording tobank type,are reported inTable1 forboth the full

periodandthesubperiods.Table1showsthattheFBs,onav-

erage, are the most cost-efficient, with scores of 79.9 percent,

followed by the CCBs (67.9 percent),JSCBs (66.5 percent), and

theSOCBs (63.1percent). Incontrast, the results forprofiteffi-

ciency show that the SOCBs (76.8percent) andJSCBs(76.2 per-

cent)arethemostprofit-efficient,followedbytheCCBs(74.3per-

cent),andFBs(38.5percent),whicharetheleastprofit-efficient.

TheresultsoftheWilcoxonMannWhitneytestsshowthatmost

of the differences are significant, and this is further confirmed

by our one-stage estimation results that are shown later, in

AppendixC(PanelB).

Thesubperiodresultsforthedifferentcategoriesofbanksare

revealing.Boththecostandprofitefficiencyresultssuggestthat

theSOCBsaretheleastefficientduringthepre-transitionperiodbutbecomethemostefficientafterthetransition.Thecosteffi-

ciencyoftheSOCBsincreasesby7.8percentandtheprofiteffi-

ciencyby24.4percentbetweenthetwoperiods.Theseincreases

inefficiencyindicatethatbankstookadvantageoftherecentre-

forms,whichincludepartialprivatization,theintroductionoffor-

eignstrategicinvestors,thelistingofbankssharecapitalonfor-

eignandChineseexchanges,andtheestablishmentofasystemfor

boardsofdirectors.Thesereformsimprovethebanksgovernance

mechanismsand lead them toengage inmoremarket-oriented

business.Incontrast,however,bothcostandprofitefficienciesof

foreignbankshavedeterioratedsignificantlyinthefinancialcrisis

period,implyingthatadversecircumstancesarisingoutofforeign

bankshomeoperationshadspillovereffectsontheirChineseop-

erations.Weanalysetheefficiencylevelsinmoredetail,bybanktype.

Figs. 1 and 2 show the average values of cost and profit effi-

ciencyover the sampleperiod,basedonbank type.Aswecan

see from Fig. 1, foreign banks exhibit very good performance

in cost efficiency relative to the other types of banks, imply-

ing that theymayhavebettermanagerialexpertise,experience,

technology, and governance. The trend or patterns of cost effi-

ciency levels for the other types of banks are broadly similar

overtime.Thecostefficiencyofdomesticbankshasgraduallyim-

provedoverthesampleperiod.ThisisduetotheChinesegovern-

mentencouragingdomesticbankstointroduceforeignstrategicin-

vestors,improvetheircorporategovernance,andbecomelistedon

stockexchanges.Thesemeasuresappeartohaveenhancedbanks

performances.


8/16

Y.Dongetal./EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch252(2016)280295 287

Table1

Averageefficiencyscoresandsignificanceoftestsfordifferentbankgroups.

Costefficiency Profitefficiency

Fullsample 20022006 20072009 20102013 Fullsample 20022006 20072010 20102013

Overall 0.697 0.655 0.701 0.712 0.685 0.656 0.674 0.705

FBs 0.799 0.836 0.784 0.802 0.385 0.491 0.357 0.385

CCBs 0.679 0.650 0.686 0.687 0.743 0.662 0.734 0.783

JSCBs 0.665 0.643 0.670 0.687 0.762 0.702 0.749 0.837

SOCBs

0

.631

0

.592

0

.645

0

.670

0

.768

0

.636

0

.840

0

.880

WilcoxonMannWhitneytest

SOCBsvsJSCBs Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Insig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

SOCBsvsCCBs Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

SOCBsvsFBs Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

JSCBsvsCCBs Sig. Insig. sig. Insig. Sig. Sig. Insig. Sig.

JSCBsvsFBs Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

CCBsvsFBs Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

Transitionvsposttransitionperiod Sig. Sig

Pre-

vs

post

financial

crisis

Sig.

Sig.

Weusethenon-parametricWilcoxonMannWhitneytesttocheckfordifferencesbetweenbanktypes.Thisisanon-parametricanaloguetotheindependentsamples

t-test

and

can

be

used

when

there

is

no

assumption

that

the

dependent

variable

is

a

normally

distributed

interval

variable.

The

significance

level

is

at

the

5

percent

level.

Fig.2.Averageprofitefficiencybybanktype.

Weobservethat foreignbanksexhibitmuch lowerprofitef-

ficiencythanothertypesofbanks(Fig.2).Thisimpliesthatfor-

eignbanksmaylacklocalknowledgeofthemarketandareham-

peredby(implicit)restrictionsontheextentoftheirbusinessac-

tivities,whichconstraintheirearningsandprofitability.Itisalso

difficultforforeignbanks,especiallythenewentrants,toattract

customerswhohavelong-termrelationshipwithdomesticbanks.

Moreover,givenlimitedbanknetworksandcustomerbase,many

loanproductsandfee-basedservicessuchasmortgageloansand

paying utility bills on behalf of bank clients may not be very

profitable.Fig.2alsoshowsadeclineinprofitefficiencyintheFBsdur-

ing2008-2009.Thissignificantdeclinemayreflectthecostsfor

FBsof settingup theirbusinessesand carryingoutbranchex-

pansionprogrammesand/oradifficultyinexpandingFBpresence

inChinaduringthatperiod.Theresultsalsosuggestthatthere-

centglobalcrisishashadanegativeimpactontheforeignbanks

inChina.However,profitefficiencyhasbegun to improve from

2009onwardsandtheimprovementmaybeduetotheremovalof

businessrestrictions,thestrongdemandforcorporatecreditfrom

multinationalsexpandingwithinChina,andanincreasingnumber

oflocalenterprisecustomers.TheprofitefficiencyofChinesedo-

mesticbankshasimprovedoverthesampleperiod,implyingthat

theyhavebenefitedfromthestrongnationaleconomicgrowthin

last tenyears.However,therewasadeclinebetween2007and

2009,whichmaybedue to theglobalfinancialcrisis thatcur-tailedgrowth.Morespecifically,theSOCBshaveshownaconsider-

ableimprovementinaverageprofitefficiencyfrom2004to2013,

climbingfrom54.1percentin2004to89.16percentin2013.This

findingimpliesthatthecontinuingbankingreformshavehelped

toimprovetheSOCBsprofitabilityandprofitefficiency.Theim-

provementmayalsobeduetostronggovernmentconnectionsand

priorityrolesinimplementinggovernmentpolicies,suchasinfras-

tructure spending,whichhaveboosted theirearningsandprof-

itability.TheCCBsalsoexhibitanincreaseinprofitefficiencyover

thesampleperiod.Thereareseveralpossibleexplanationsforthis

result.First,inthepast,theCCBswereoftencontrolleddirectlyby

localgovernmentsandexperiencedsignificantpressuretolendfor

policypurposes.However,duringthelastdecade,thelocalgov-

ernments

ownership

in

CCBs

has

decreased

significantly

and

this

mayhavecorrespondinglyreducedpoliticalinferenceinthebanks

operatingdecisions,leadingtoimprovedcorporategovernanceand

profitperformance.Inaddition,theCCBsoftenfocusontheusury

market,whereborrowerssuchassmallandmedium-sizedbusi-

nessesarechargedrelativelyhighinterestrates.Asaresult,these

bankscouldbereapingveryhighprofitsthatimprovetheirprofit

efficiency.

CCBs play an increasingly important role in the funding of

SMEs.Overall,Chinasgrowthhasbeenimpressivebutthereare

considerableimbalancesintheeconomicdevelopmentacrossdif-

ferentregionsofthecountry.Themunicipalitiesandtheeastern

andcoastalareashavegenerallydevelopedmorequicklyandhave

morematureprivateeconomies than thenorthernandwestern

areas.Therefore,wenowinvestigatewhethertheperformanceof

aCCBdependsontheeconomicdevelopmentofthegeographi-

calareainwhichitconductsitsbusiness.WedivideChinainto

six economic regions plus an extra category made up of four

municipalities27.AsshowninTable2,theCCBsinthe(eastern)

coastaland(central)southareasexhibitgoodoverallperformance

intermsofbothcostandprofitefficiency.TheCCBslocatedinfour

municipalitiesshowhighprofitefficiencybutlowcostefficiency.

However,theCCBs inthenorth,northwest,andnortheastshow

27The six regions are the centre and south (Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Anhui

andJiangxi),theeastcoast(Jiangsu,Zhejiang,Fujian,Shandong,Guangdongand

Hainan),thenorth(InnerMongolia,HebeiandShanxi),thenortheast(Jilin,Liaon-

ingandHeilongjiang),thesouthwest(Sichuan,Guizhou,Yunnan,GuangxiandTi-

bet),andthenorthwest(Shaanxi,Gansu,Qinghai,NingxiaandXinjiang),andthe

four

municipalities

are

Beijing,

Shanghai,

Tianjin,

and

Chongqing.


9/16


Table2

AverageefficiencyofCCBsbyregionandadministrativestatus.

Costefficiency Profitefficiency

Fullsample 20022006 20072009 20092013 Fullsample 20022006 20072009 20102013

Centralandsouth 0.698 0.665 0.696 0.707 0.772 0.627 0.742 0.827

Eastcoast 0.685 0.660 0.686 0.687 0.763 0.677 0.698 0.821

North 0.680 0.657 0.687 0.686 0.675 0.638 0.621 0.716

Northeast 0.678 0.652 0.678 0.685 0.750 0.669 0.743 0.783

Northwest

0

.679

0

.633

0

.680

0

.695

0

.734

0

.673

0

.754

0

.748

Southwest 0.683 0.660 0.692 0.688 0.734 0.571 0.710 0.832

Municipalities 0.645 0.615 0.658 0.659 0.784 0.717 0.800 0.817

Non-provincialcapitalcities 0.689 0.662 0.695 0.696 0.741 0.654 0.747 0.772

Provincialcapitalcities 0.670 0.641 0.673 0.677 0.735 0.650 0.690 0.792

relativelylowlevelsofcostandprofitefficiency.Theseresultssug-

gestthataCCBsperformanceispositivelyrelatedtothelevelof

economicdevelopment intheregioninwhichit islocated.The

subperiodresultsshowthatbanksfromallregionshaveimproved

boththeircostandprofitefficienciessincethetransitionperiod,

whichsuggeststhatstrongeconomicgrowthcanleadtosignifi-

cant

efficiency

gains

for

banks

in

all

regions.

Banksinprovincialcapitalsgenerallycomeunderstricterreg-

ulatoryscrutinyandpayhighersubsidiesthanthoseincitiesthat

arenotthecapitalsofprovinces.Thus,wealsoinvestigatewhether

theadministrativestatusofthecityinwhichthebankislocated

playsarole indetermining itsefficiency.Wecompareboth the

costandprofitefficiencyofCCBs inprovincialcitiesand cities

thatarenotprovincialcapitals.Banksfromnon-provincialcapital

citiesshowmorecostandprofitefficiencythanthebanksfrom

provincialcapitalcities.Meanwhile,thesubperiodresultsshow

that,althoughbothsubcategoriesofbankshaveenjoyedimprove-

mentsinbothcostandprofitefficiency,theCCBsincitiesthatare

notprovincialcapitalshavebenefittedmoresincethetransition

period.

5.3.

Economies

of

scale

Industry economies of scale have important implications for

regulatorsandbankmanagersintermsofgrowthandmergerand

acquisitionissues.Inthissectionweusethecostfrontiermodel

outlinedearlier,toanalysetheeconomiesofscaleintheChinese

bankingsectorovertheperiod2002-2013forthesamefourcate-

goriesofbanksasabove.

Table3reportstheannualestimatesofscaleeconomiescalcu-

latedusingtheSFAmodel.Wefindthattheeconomiesofscale

fornon-SOCBbanksovertheperiod20022013aresignificantly

greaterthanone,suggestingtheexistenceofeconomiesofscale

intheChinesebankingsector.Wealsonotethattheestimatesex-

hibitadecreasingtrendovertimeandthispatternindicatesthat

Chinesebankshavemadeeffortstoachieveoptimaloperatingef-ficiencyovertime(constantreturnstoscale).Basedontheesti-

matesforeachtypeofbank,thetableshowsthatsignificantscale

economiesexistintheCCBsandFBs.This,inturn,impliesthat

smallbankscanpotentiallysaveonoperatingcostsbyextending

theirproductionscaleorthroughmergers.FortheSOCBs,thescale

economiesaresignificantlylessthanone,withaslightlydecreas-

ingtrend.Thisresultsuggeststhatthebigbanksareexperienc-

ingdiseconomiesofscaleand,therefore,couldreducetheiraver-

agecostsandachieveefficiencygainsbydecreasingtheirscaleof

operations.However,thebigSOCBswillfacemajorchallengesif

theytrytocuttheircosts,forexample,byreducingthenumber

ofbranchesandemployeesacrossthecountryandreducingthe

largeamountoflendingforsocialandpoliticalpurposes.More-

over, as the SOCBs are generally in a monopoly position, they

Fig.3.ShadowreturnonequityforChinesebanks(20022013).

havelessincentivetoreducetheircostsbydownsizing.Note,also,

that the scale economies forJSCBs for the later sample period

(20062013)areveryclosetounity(thatis,thesebanksexhibitalmostconstantreturnstoscale),indicatingthattheJSCBsgener-

allyhaveoptimalassetsizeandarethemostscale-efficientbanks.

Insummary,theresultssuggest thattheaveragecostcurve for

theChinesebankingsectorisU-shaped,withmedium-sizedbanks

being more scale-efficient than either very large or very small

banks.

5.4.

Shadow

return

on

equity

AsmostChinesebankswereundercapitalizedbeforethecoun-

tryjoinedtheWTOin2001,oneofthemostimportantaspects

oftherecentbankingreformswastherecapitalizationofthedo-

mesticbanks inorderthattheywouldfulfiltheminimumcap-

ital adequacy ratio (8 percent) requirement. Therefore, one ofthekeyobjectivesof thispaper is toexamine theeffectof re-

capitalizationontheChinesebankingindustrybyexaminingthe

SROE.

Asshown inFig.3, there isadecreasing trend in theSROE

fordifferenttypesofbanksoverthefullsampleperiod.However,

theSROEofForeignbanksandJSCBsshowanincreaseduringthe

globalfinancialcrisisperiod,implyingthatthesebanksseemwill-

ingtopaymoretoincreasetheirequitycapitalduringthatperiod.

Theseresultssuggestthatrecapitalizationleadstoadecreasein

theSROE;thedeclinemayalsoreflecttherelativelylowfunding

costsandtheincreasedcompetitionintheChinesebankingsector.

TheincreaseinSROEin20082009maybeduetoariseinthe

centralbanksinterestrateandfundingcostsduringthoseyears,

thusimplyingthatthesebanksarewillingtopaymoretoraise


10/16


Table3

EconomiesofscaleestimationsforChinesebanks(20022013).

All 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

FB 1.178 1.307 1.275 1.208 1.182 1.174 1.164 1.171 1.166 1.160 1.105 1.085 1.076

CCB 1.116 1.237 1.198 1.169 1.163 1.157 1.142 1.118 1.091 1.087 1.081 1.075 1.071

JSCB 1.016 1.091 1.075 1.052 1.035 1.024 1.020 1.018 1.015 1.009 0.995 0.993 0.987

SOCB 0.869 0.902 0.881 0.887 0.879 0.875 0.870 0.869 0.871 0.868 0.861 0.855 0.849

All 1.078 1.183 1.175 1.162 1.094 1.089 1.065 1.056 1.058 1.049 1.044 1.041 1.036

Notes

:

1.

Scale

economies

estimates

are

evaluated

at

the

mean

of

the

data

rather

than

the

mean

estimate

of

scale

economies

calculated

at

eachobservation.

2.Indicatesthatscaleeconomiesestimatesarestatisticallydifferentfrom1atthe5percentlevel,foratwo-tailedtest.

Table4

AverageSROEindifferentsubsamplesandtestforgroupdifferences.

CE SROE PE SROE

Mostefficientquartile 291 0.785 0.016 288 0.895 -0.003

Leastefficientquartile 291 0.629 0.073 288 0.329 0.094

TestofSROEdifferencea 4.833 11.349

andindicatethatthedifferencebetweenthemostefficientquartileofbanks

andtheleastefficientquartileofbanksissignificantatthe5percentor1percent

level,

respectively.aNotes:Z-valuefromtheWilcoxonMannWhitneyUtestofdifferencesinme-

dians.

theirequitycapitalduringthefinancialcrisisperiod.Itisinterest-

ingtonotethatthesignontheSROEispositiveinitially,butbe-

comesnegativebytheendoftheperiod.Thismaybebecause,dur-

ingorafterasevererecapitalizationperiod,bankstendtodeviate

fromtheirlong-runequilibrium,whichcancausetheSROEtobe-

comenegative.ThisfindingisconsistentwithDuygunetal.(2012),

whofindthat,duringarecapitalizationperiod,theSROEsofTurk-

ishbanksalsobecomenegative.Inaddition,wefindthatthemean

SROEisconsistentlyhigherforFBsthanfordomesticcommercial

banks.ThisimpliesthatFBsarestillunderutilizingequitycapital

orhavefundingcoststhatarehigherthanthoseoftheircounter-parts.

Overall,ourresultssuggestthattheshort-runadjustmentfrom

onehighlyleveragedequilibriumpositiontoanotherwithlower

leveragecanimposesignificantshort-runadjustmentcosts.Policy

makersshouldbecautiousofthefactthattheincreasedefficiency

maybeoffsetbytheadjustmentcostsimposedbytherecapitaliza-

tionprocess.Thisisacriticalquestionforbothpolicymakersand

bankingregulators.

5.5.Efficiencyandshadowreturnonequity

TherelationbetweentheSROEandbankscostandprofiteffi-

ciencyisalsoofinterest.Table4reportsthemeanoftheSROEfor

the

most

and

least

efficient

quartiles

of

banks.

We

find

that

the

mostefficientbankshavesignificantlysmallerSROEs.This indi-

catesthattheleastefficientbanksappeartobeover-leveragedand

appeartounderutilizeequityrelativetothemostefficientbanks,

andtheymaybeabletoimprovetheirefficiencybyholdingextra

capital.

Giventheabsenceofaprioritheoryregardingtherelationbe-

tweenefficiencyandSROE,wealsousethePVARmethodforour

analysis.ThePVARframeworkexplicitlyaddressestheendogene-

ity problem by treating all variables as potentially endogenous

andmodellingthefeedbackloopsbetweenthevariables28.Table4

reports thecorrelationsbetween the (costandprofit)efficiency

28SeeLoveandZicchino(2006),Koutsomanoli-FilippakiandMamatzakis(2009),

and

Love

and

Turk

Ariss

(2014)

for

a

more

detailed

discussion

on

the

PVAR

method.

Table5

PanelVARofatwovariablemodel.

Dependentvariable CE-1 SROE-1 Obs

CE 0.402(0.219) 0.032(0.018) 878

SROE 0.644(0.435) 0.744(0.048) 878

PE-1

SROE-1

Obs

PE 0.196(0.181) 0.224(0.053) 866

SROE 0.116(0.055) 0.790(0.020) 866

Notes

:

The

PVAR

models

are

estimated

using

system

GMM.

Reported

numbersshowthecoefficientsofregressingthedependentvariables

onlagsoftheindependentvariables.

, and indicatethe1percent,5percentand10percentsignifi-

cance

levels,

respectively.

scoresandtheSROE.Wefindanegativerelationshipbetweenthe

efficiencyscoresandtheestimatedSROE.Table5presentsthepa-

rameterestimatesofthesystemofequationsforcostandprofitef-

ficiencyandSROE.TheSROEimpactoncostefficiencyisnegative

butnotsignificant;howeveritsimpactonprofitefficiencyissignif-

icantandnegative,suggestingthat,generally,decreasingtheSROE

byraisingequitycapitalcouldleadtoincreasedprofitefficiency

levelsforbanks29.Ontheotherhand,theimpactofSROEonboth

profitandcostefficienciesissignificantandnegative.Thisresultimplies that a causal relationship from SROE to efficiency may

exist.

Nextwefocusourdiscussionontheimpulse-responseresults

presentedinFig.4whichshowtheresponseofeachvariableof

theVARanalysis(costorprofitefficiencyandSROE)toitsown

innovationandtotheinnovationoftheothervariable.Fromthe

firstrowofFig.4theeffectofaonestandarddeviationshockof

SROEoncostandprofitefficiencyisnegativebutisrelativelysmall

inmagnitude.TheresponseofefficiencytoashockinSROEtakes

placeafter2years,whileitconvergestowardsthezerolinethere-

after.Theseresultsweaklyconfirmourpreviousfindingthatre-

ducedSROEcouldleadtoincreasedefficiency.Ontheotherhand,

weobservethatSROEdecreasesinresponsetoapositiveshock

inefficiency, suggesting that reversecausality in regard toeffi-ciencyandSROEalsoexistsandindicatingthatimprovementinef-

ficiencycouldreducethetrueimplicitreturnonequity(i.e.,SROE).

Tofurthersupportouranalysis,wepresentvariancedecomposi-

tions(VDCs),whichindicatethepercentageofthevariationinone

variablethatisexplainedbytheshockinanother.Wereportthe

totaleffectaccumulatedover10and20yearsinTable6.Weob-

servethatcostandprofitefficienciesexplainabout30and24per-

centof thevariation inSROEafter20years,respectively,while

SROEexplainsabout7and7.6percentofthevarianceincostand

profitefficiencies,respectively.Theresultsprovidemoreevidence

29Onemustbearinmind,asweshowedintheprevioussection,thatmassive

recapitalizationcanpushtheSROEintoanegativeregion.Theadjustmentcostsim-

posed

by

a

recapitalization

process

could

offset

the

efficiency

gains.


11/16


Fig.4.Impulseresponsefunctionstoshocks.

Table6

Estimatesofvariancedecomposition.

S CE SROE PE SROE

CE 10 0.982 0.017 PE 0.982 0.018

SROE 10 0.298 0.699 SROE 0.238 0.760

CE 20 0.982 0.018 PE 0.981 0.019

SROE 20 0.301 0.702 SROE 0.240 0.762

Note:S:timeperiodsahead(yearsahead);CE:costefficiency;

PE:profitefficiency.

reaffirmingthesignificanceofefficiencyinexplainingthevariation

inSROE.

5.6.Determinantsofcostandprofitefficiency

ThemainbenefitofusingBatteseandCoellis(1995)modelis

thatitenablesustonotonlyexaminethelevelofefficiencybut

alsoinvestigatethepotentialdeterminantsofefficiencyinChinese

banks30.The impactofenvironmentalfactorsonChinesebanks

costandprofitefficienciesarereportedinpanelBofAppendixC.

Thecoefficientson the logarithmof totalassetsarestatistically

significantandpositivefortheprofitefficiencyscores,indicating

thatlargerbanksseemtoberelativelymoreprofit-efficientthan

smallerbanks.Ourfindingshereareinlinewithmanyprevious

efficiencystudies (e.g.,Srairi,2010).Thiseffectcouldbedue to

largerbankswiderpenetrationofthemarketandtheirabilityto

increaserevenueatarelativelylowercost(Perera,Skully,&Wicck-

ramanayake,2007).Theymayalsohavemoreprofessionalorspe-

cializedmanagementteamsthatarebetterabletocontrolcosts

andincreaserevenue.

PositiveandstatisticallysignificantcoefficientsfortheLerner

index in the costmodel, suggest that bankswith greater mar-

ketpower(alargerLernervalue)arebetteratminimizingcosts.

However, we also find a significantly negative relationship be-

tweentheLernerindexandprofitefficiency.Thisresultseemsto

supportthatthequietlife hypothesis,whichassertsthatbanks

30WealsousePVARtoexaminetherelationsbetweentheefficiencyscoresand

theirdeterminantfactorsasarobustnesstest.InaPVARsystemallvariablesare

endogenouslydetermined.Therefore,weonlyincludethevariables(i.e.banksize,

HHI,LernerIndex,andgovernmentownership)whichmightbeconsideredtobe

endogenousforthePVARanalysis.Theresultsaregenerallyconsistentwiththe

findingsbyusingtheonestagestochasticfrontierapproach(SFA).Theresultsare

available

on

request.

withmarketpowerforegorevenuesorincurhighercosts.How-

ever, we do not find any significant relationship between effi-ciencyandtheconcentrationindicator(HHI)31.Concerningtheef-

fectofastockexchange listingonbankefficiency,wefindthat

thecoefficientassociatedwiththelistedbankdummyvariableis

statisticallysignificant,withapositiveimpactoncostefficiency.

Thisresultsuggeststhattheintensepublicscrutinythataccom-

paniesastocklistingexertsmarketdisciplineoverbankmanage-

ment and listed banks are thus more cost-efficient than banks

thatare not listed. However, this relationship isnot significant

in theprofitefficiency model, suggesting that the listingeffect

doesnotcontribute to the levelofprofitefficiency. Inaddition,

thecoefficientsshowthatFBsexhibithighercostefficienciesthan

JSCBs,SOCBs,andCCBsbutsignificantlyunderperformothertypes

ofbanksintermsofprofitefficiency.Themagnitudesoftheco-

efficients

indicate

that

JSCBs

are

the

most

cost

efficient

among

ChinesedomesticbanksandSOCBsarethemostprofit-efficient.

Theseresultsgenerallyconfirmthefindingsdiscussedearlier.Fi-

nally,wefindthatbankswithhighergovernmentownershiptend

tobemoreprofitefficient,implyingthatthehigherlevelofgov-

ernment guarantee can help banks to reduce some borrowing

costsandincreaserevenue,whichinturnimprovesbanksprofit

efficiency.

6.Conclusion

Thispaperexaminesthecostandprofitefficienciesof142com-

mercialbanksinChina,overtheperiod20022013.Itcompares

theperformanceofChinesebanksacrossdifferentownershiptypes

before

and

after

the

completion

of

the

WTO

transition

period

(in-

cludingpostglobalfinancialcrisisperiod).Ourfindingsshowthat

the costand profitefficiency levelsare, on average,around70

percent.Toimproveefficiencylevels,banksneedtopaymoreat-

tentiontoboththecost-minimizingandrevenue-generatingpro-

cesses.Wefurthercomparetheefficiencybasedondifferenttypes

ofbanks.TheCCBsandJSCBsshowmorecostefficiencythanthe

SOCBsoverthesampleperiod.However,theCCBsarelessprofit-

efficient,whiletheFBshavethelowestprofitefficiencyscores.We

findthatboththecostandprofitefficiencyhaveincreasedacross

alltypesofdomesticbankssincetheWTOtransitionperiodwas

31Manystudiesusethemarketconcentrationmeasureasaproxyforthedegree

ofmarketpowerbutthisbroadmeasurefailstoassessindividualfirms abilitiesto

charge

marked-up

prices

(

Boone,

2008

).


12/16


completed.Thisimprovementsuggeststhatopeningupthebank-

ingsectorhashadapositiveeffectontheperformanceofChinas

banks,andthereisnodoubtthattherecentbankingreform in

Chinahasbeenfruitful.However,theprofitadvantageofdomestic

banksoverforeignbanksiswideningaftertheWTOtransitionpe-

riodbecauseofinstitutionalarrangementsandculturalandsocial

networks.

GiventheincreasingimportanceofCCBstotheChinesebanking

sector,

we

also

compare

CCBs

based

on

geographical

differences.

OurfindingsshowthatCCBsinthefourmunicipalitiesandinmore

developedareasofChinaenjoythehighestperformancelevelsin

termsofprofitefficiency,suggestingthatthelevelofeconomicde-

velopmentintheregioninwhichaCCBislocatedplaysanimpor-

tantroleindeterminingtheCCBsperformance.Thesubperiodre-

sultsshowthatbanksfromallregionsimproveboththeircostand

profitefficiencyscoresaftertheWTOtransitionperiod.Wenext

doacomparisonofwhetherCCBs incitiesthatarenotprovin-

cialcapitalsexhibithigherefficiencylevelsthanthoseinprovin-

cialcities.Ourempiricalresultsshowthateconomiesofscaleare

prevalentacross theChinesebanking sector.This ismainly the

resultofwidespreadscaleeconomiesinsmall-sizedCCBs,suggest-

ing that thisgroupcouldobtaincost savingsby increasing the

scaleoftheiroperations.Incontrast,theSOCBssufferfromdis-

economiesofscale.

TheSROEresultsillustrateanoveralldecreasingtrendoverthe

sampleperiodbutwithaslightincreaseduringtheperiod2008-

2009.ItisinterestingtonotethatthesignonaverageSROEbe-

comesnegativeafterthefinancialcrisis.Thechangeinsigncan

beexplainedbytheincreaseinthecapitalratioduetotherecent

capitalinjectiongiventodomesticbanks.Thissuggeststhatpol-

icymakersandregulatorsshouldbecautiousaboutsuchstrategies,

astheincreasedefficiencymaybeoffsetbyadjustmentcostsim-

posedbytherecapitalizationprocess.Regulatorsshouldbealert

to the fact thatwhenbanksare reducingpositionsofprevious

over-leveraging, thedisequilibrium true implicitROEcould turn

negative for a substantial period. Moreover, by using the PVAR

method, we find negative relationships between the efficiency

scoresand theSROE.On theotherhand,wealsofindastrongreversecausalrelationshipbetweenthem,suggestingthatanin-

creaseinefficiencyleadstoadecreaseinSROE.Last,butnotleast,

weinvestigatethefactorsthatinfluencetheefficiencyofChinese

banks.Wefindthatmarketpowerandownershiptypesignificantly

influence both the cost and profit efficiency of Chinese banks.

Moreover,largerbanksandbankswithahighlevelofgovernment

guaranteearemoreprofitefficientthatotherbanks.

Ourresultshaveimportantpolicyimplications.First,theevi-

dencefromourstudyshowsthattherecentChinesebankingre-

formhasbeensuccessful inenhancing theperformanceofChi-

nesebanks,onboththecostandtheprofitside.However,there

isstillmuchroomforimprovement,giventhecurrentlevelsofef-

ficiency.Themainsourceofinefficiencycomesfromboththecost

and

revenue

side,

implying

a

need

for

more

fundamental

changes

inmanagementandoperationaldecision-makingprocesses,from

policyorientationtomarketorientation.Second,asCCBsareplay-

inganincreasinglyimportantroleinlocaleconomicdevelopment

andthefundingofSMEs,thecentralauthoritiesshouldencour-

age and give more support to the development of CCBs, espe-

ciallythoseinlessdevelopedregionssuchasthenorthandnorth-

west.Third,thefindingsregardingeconomiesofscalesuggestthat

smallbankssuchasCCBscouldimprovetheirefficiencybyincreas-

ingtheirsize,perhapsthroughmergersandacquisitions.Inaddi-

tion,thegovernmentshouldcompletelyremovetherestrictionon

CCBsthatforcesthemtooperatewithintheirowncitiesbound-

aries.Thisgeographicalconstraintislikelytodamageperformance

levelsbypreventingtheCCBsfromexploringmorebusinessop-

portunities,effectivelyspreadingrisk,andachievingeconomiesof

scale.Moreover,smallbanksinChinaaregenerallynotabletoof-

ferafullrangeofservicesbecauseeithertheyaretooexpensive

toprovideoraresubjecttoregulatoryconstraints.Therefore,the

smallbankscouldadopttheoperationalmodelofsmallU.S.banks

bypurchasing(standardizedandinfrequent)servicesandproducts

fromlargerbanksthatareeitherabletoofferabroaderrangeof

servicesuchascheck-clearing,mortgageandcreditcardprocess-

ing,investmentbankingservices,andinternationaltransactions32.

Toaccomplishthis,smallbankscouldreduceoperatingexpenses

andincreaserevenuesbyprovidingcheaperandbroaderservices

to their customers,which in turn improve thebanks costand

profitefficiency.Fourth,theSROEanalysisshouldremindpolicy

makerstobecautiousaboutthe factthat,althoughan increase

inequitycapitalmayhelpbankstoabsorbfinanciallosses,italso

imposesshort-runadjustmentcoststhatmayoffsetthegainsinefficiency.Finally,aspubliclistingisshowntohaveapositiveef-

fectoncostefficiency,theChinesegovernmentshouldencourage

domesticbanks to seek an IPO. This willhelpbanks towiden

their funding sources, reduce their relianceon thegovernment,

andachievebettercorporategovernanceandtransparency.

32

We

thank

the

reviewer

for

pointing

this

issue

out.


13/16


AppendixA

Author/Year Banks(obs.) Period Method Variables Mainresults

Chenetal.(2005) 43(NA) 19932000 DEA Outputs:loans,depositsand

non-interestincome.

BigFourstate-ownedbankshadhigher

technicalefficiencyandallocative

efficiencythanthenationalJSCBs.

Inputs:

labour,

deposit

and

physicalcapital

Ariff andCan(2008) 28(230) 19952004 DEA Outputs:loansandinvestments. Overallaveragecostefficiencyishigher

thantheoverallaverageprofit

efficiency

Profit

efficiency

remarkably

increased

whilecostefficiencyremained

almostunimprovedoverthestudy

period.

Inputs:loanablefunds,numberof

employeesandphysicalcapital.

JSCBsandCCBs,onaverage,appearto

bemoreefficientthantheSOCBs.

Medium-sizedChinesebanksare

significantlymoreefficientthanboth

theirsmallerorlargercounterparts.

FuandHeffernan

(2007)

14(187) 19852002 SFA Outputs:totalloans,totaldepositstotal

investmentsandnon-interestincome

JSCBswererelativelymoreX-efficient

thantheSOCBs

Inputs:

funds,

labour

and

fixed

assets

Kumbhakar

and

Wang

(2007)

14

(132)

19932002

SFA

Outputs:

total

loans

net,

other

earning

assets

Four largest SOCBs are less technically

efficient

than

the

JSCBs

Inputs:labour,fixedassets,total

depositandtotalborrowedfunds

smallbankstendtobemoreefficient

thanlargebanks

Bergeretal.(2009) 38(266) 19942003 SFA Outputs:totalloans,totaldeposits,

liquidassets,otherearningassets

Foreignbanksandnon-Big-Four

state-ownedbanksarethemost

cost-efficientChinesebanks,with

privatedomesticbanksbeingthe

leastcost-efficient.

Inputs:interestexpensesand

non-interestexpenses

Foreignbanksarethemost

profit-efficientandBigFour

state-owned

banks

are

the

least

profit-efficient.

Minorityforeignownershiphasa

positiveeffectonbothcostand

profitefficiency.

Jiangetal.(2009) N/A(310) 19952005 SFA Model1:Outputs:netinterestincome

andnon-interestincome;Inputs:

total

interest

expense

and

non-interestexpense.

Joint stock bank s and the Big Four

state-ownedbanksarethemost

efficient

Chinese

banks,

with

foreign

bankstheleastefficient.

Model2:Outputs:totalloans,total

depositsandnon-interest

income;Inputs:totalinterest

expense,

labour

costs

and

physical

capital.

Model3:Outputs:totalloans,total

depositandotherearningassets;

Inputs:totalinterestexpense,

physicalcapital,andlabourcosts.

AsmildandMatthews

(2012)

14(168) 19972008 DEA Outputs:netinterestearningsand

non-interestearnings

Jointequitybanksaremoreefficient

thantheBigFourstate-ownedbanks.

Inputs:numberofemployees,fixed

assets,totaldeposits

Since 2003, the efficiency of the

state-ownedbankshasimproved.

Hou, Wang, and Zhang

(2014)

44(N/A) 20072011 DEA Outputs:totalnetloan,otherearning

assets

Intense market competition helps

improvetechnicalefficiencyand

technical

efficiency

is

positive

associatedwithrisktaking

Inputs:totaldeposits,fixedassetsand

no.ofemployees

Wang,Huang,Wu,and

Liu(2014)

16(114) 20032011 DEA Outputs:noninterestincomeand

interestincome

TheChinesebankingreformimproves

itsoverallefficiencyoverthestudy

period.

Inputs:fixedassetsandlabour Efficiencydifferencesbetweenthe

state-ownedandjoint-stock

commercialbanksarereducedover

thestudyperiod

Notes:N/A:notavailable;DEA:dataenvelopmentanalysis;SFA:stochasticfrontieranalysis.


14/16


AppendixB.Descriptivestatisticsofvariables

Description Obs. Mean Std.Dev. Min. Max.

Fullsample

Totalcosta 1163 9881.474 31874.85 21.699 281002

Profitbeforetaxa 1150 5394.766 20706.68 0.475 221342.1

Totalloansa 1163 194198.7 647149.2 58.871 5536780

Totalotherearningassetsa 1163 89983.76 322630.7 0.589 2834485

Non-interestincomea 1163 2072.933 7757.766 0.353 79329.89

Priceoffunds 1163 0.0205 0.0091 0.004 0.081

Price

of

physical

capital

1163

1.2897

2.2010

0.087

22.125

Priceoflaboura 1163 0.1373 0.0723 0.019 0.560958

Equitya 1163 20846.27 75182.19 1.213 745433.8

Timetrend 1163 7.988822 2.9157 1 12

Totalassetsa 1163 372112 1237182 609.601 10600000

Governmentownership 1163 0.1437 0.2018 0 1

Herfindahlindex 1163 0.1030 0.0178 0.077 0.153

Lernerindex 1163 0.4048 0.1783 -1.651 0.764

Listedbanks 1163 0.1263 0.3324 0 1

SOCBs 1163 0.0515 0.221294 0 1

JSCBs 1163 0.1169 0.321486 0 1

CCBs

1163

0.6509

0.47689

0

1

Foreignbanks 1163 0.1805 0.384825 0 1

Bigbanks(SOCBs)

Total

cost

a 60

124909.1

65934.39

18955

281002


Totalloansa 60 2614144 1246107 426763 5536780

Totalotherearningassetsa 60 1275640 702515.1 159301 2834485

Non-interestincomea 60 27383.33 21255.59 1863 79329.89

Priceoffunds 60 0.01626 0.003274 0.011494 0.025698

Priceofphysicalcapital 60 0.43569 0.090474 0.231227 0.592833

Priceoflaboura 60 0.094306 0.031635 0.038762 0.140135

Equitya 60 278064.2 188127.5 1.308942 745433.8

Totalassetsa 60 4943842 2487303 732003 10600000

Governmentownership 60 0.724161 0.218669 0.3095 1

LernerIndex 60 0.1812 0.1236 -0.1512 0.3321

Listed

banks

60

0.633333

0.485961

0

1

Mediumbanks(JSCBs)

Total

cost

a 136

19377.3

18099.23

458.0666

80699.81

Profit

before

tax

a

136

9114.726

10295.95

253.6

45454.09Totalloansa 136 346777.7 284570.2 7276 1293452

Totalotherearningassetsa 136 114123.5 96673.73 3189.501 503300.8

Non-interestincomea 136 2893.293 3774.171 107.8652 20066.19

Priceoffunds 136 0.021113 0.006884 0.010444 0.044811


Priceoflaboura 136 0.18368 0.056272 0.022108 0.318255

Equitya 136 32538.38 35862.93 1.213689 156571

Totalassetsa 136 6.727941 3.415578 1 12

Governmentownership 136 0.061981 0.143594 0 0.7088

LernerIndex 136 0.2202 0.0973 -0.2526 0.3876

Listed

banks

136

0.558824

0.498363

0

1

Smallbanks(CCBs&FBs)

Total

cost

a 967

1408.788

2114.895

21.69921

23217.14


Totalloansa 967 22588.12 33573.69 58.87103 344314.2

Totalotherearningassetsa 967 13021.63 20843.47 0.58871 188705.2

Non-interest

income

a

967

387.1074

281.7002

0.353226

2690.583

Priceoffunds 967 0.020713 0.009597 0.003838 0.080087


Priceoflaboura 967 0.133457 0.073245 0.018988 0.560958

Equitya 967 3242.133 4358.811 30.53464 46099.61

Totalassetsa 967 8.258532 2.724281 1 12

Governmentownership 967 0.11926 0.144002 0 0.9264

LernerIndex 967 0.2659 0.1865 -1.6509 0.7647

Listed

banks

967

0.034126

0.181647

0

1

a Unit: RMB one million.
http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-


15/16


AppendixC.Parameterestimatesofthecostandprofitfrontier

Costfrontier Profitfrontier

Variables Coefficient t-Ratio Variables Coefficient t-Ratio

PanelA

lny1 0.564 35.93 lny1 0.232

7.41

lny2 0.138 14.39 lny2 0.067

4.24

lny3

0.135 7.77 lny3

0.151 5.2

ln(w

1

/w

3

)

0

.730

56

.03

lnw

1

0

.092

3

.02

ln(w2

/w3

) 0.055 5.65 lnw2

0.179 8.00

lnw3 0.164 5.17

0.5 lny1^2

0.004 0.15 0.5 lny1^2 0.122 3.01

lny1 lny2 0.033 9.84 lny1 lny2 0.038

1.68

lny1 lny3 0.034

2.22 lny1 lny3 0.11326 3.87

0.5lny2^2 0.024 7.94 0.5lny2

^2 0.015 1.83

lny2 lny3 0.024

2.34 lny2 lny3 0.002 0.09

0.5lny3^2 0.072 5.24 0.5lny3

^2 0.099 4.04

0.5ln(w1/w3)^2 0.066 2.77 0.5lnw1

^2

0.236 2.48

ln(w1/w3)ln(w2/w3) 0.017 1.18 lnw1

lnw2 0.128

3.18

lnw1

lnw3

0.063 0.82

0.5ln(w2

/w3

)^2 0.003 0.23 0.5lnw2

^

2 0.021 1.21

Lnw2

lnw3

0.003 0.06

lny1ln(w1/w3) 0.055

3.47 lny1

lnw1 0.152

2.71

lny1ln(w2/w3) 0.102

7.68 lny1lnw2 0.110

2.76

lny1lnw3 0.103

2.42

lny2

ln(w1

/w3

) 0.015 2.19 lny2

lnw1

0.061 2.04

lny2ln(w2/w3) 0.011

1.93 lny2

lnw2 -0.060

4.48

lny2lnw

3 0.021 0.72

lny3ln(w1/w3) 0.036

1.93 lny3

lnw1 0.110 2.76

lny3ln(w2/w3) 0.037

2.55 lny3lnw2 0.787

3.30

lny3lnw3 0.117

2.85

lnz 0.131 7.48 lnz 0.344 11.26

0.5lnz^2 0.000 0.04 0.5lnz^2 0.061 6.64

lnzlny1

0.021 2.08 lnzlny1

0.001 0.03

lnzlny2 0.032 3.99 lnzlny2 0.048

2.26

lnzlny3 0.011 0.93 lnzlny3 0.014 0.86

lnz1ln(w1/w3) 0.080

4.36 lnzlnw1 0.132 2.11

lnz1ln(w2/w3) 0.104

6.58 lnzlnw2 0.042

1.96

lnzlnw3 0.049 1.61

T 0.015 1.1 T 0.014 1.27

0.5T^2 0.003 1.61 0.5T^2 0.001 0.4

Tlny1 0.058 7.02 Tlny1 0.020 2.69

Tlny2

0.021 5.21 Tlny2

0.005278 1.02

Tlny

3

0

.004

1

.12

Tlny

3

0

.028

4

.47

Tln(w1

/w3

) 0.009 2.13 Tlnw1

0.008 0.51

Tln(w2

/w3

) 0.002 0.6 Tlnw2

0.023 2.93

Tlnw3 0.018 1.5

Tlnz 0.024 6.1 Tlnz 0.005 0.62

Constant 0.619 0.05 Constant 0.638 16.46

PanelB

Inefficiencyterm Efficiencyterm

Intercept 0.542 0.05 Intercept 13.110 20.44

lnTA

0

.825

0

.68

lnTA

0

.787

2

.16

Lerner

0

.555

9

.99

Lerner 5.095 20.15

HHI 0.063 0.03 HHI 3.999 1.36

Listed 0.070 2.55 Listed 0.280 1.45

SOCB 0.302 3.37 SOCB 1.487 4.72

JSCB 0.210 5.56 JSCB 0.605 6.38

CCB 0.303 -11.63 CCB 0.485 3.55

GOVOWN 0.065 1.5 GOVOWN 0.374 1.99

sigma-squared

1

.280

sigma-squared

0

.2873

Gamma 0.893 gamma 0.941

Notes:BecausetheoriginalresultsfromtheBatteseandCoellis(1995)modelprovidetherelationbetweenthedeterminantfactorsandcostinefficiencyscores,we

thereforereverseallsignsoftheestimatesparameterswiththedeterminantvariablestoidentifyeffectsofthesevariablesoncostefficiency;, an d indicatethe1

percent,5percentand10percentsignificancelevels,respectively.

References

Aigner,D.,Lovell,C.A.K.,&Schmidt,P.(1977).Formulationandestimationofstochasticfrontierproductionfunctionmodels.JournalofEconometrics,6,2137.

Allen,F.,Qian,J.,&Qian,M.(2005).Law,financeandeconomicgrowthinChina.JournalofFinancialEconomics,33,926954.

Ariff,M.,&Can,L.(2008).CostandprofitefficiencyofChinesebanks:anon-

parametric

analysis.

China

Economic

Review,

19

,

260273

.

Asmild,M.,&Matthews,K.(2012).Multi-directionalefficiencyanalysisofefficiencypatternsinChinesebanks1997-2008.EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch,219,434441.

Battese,G.E.,&Coelli,T.J.(1995).Amodelfortechnicalinefficiencyeffectsinastochasticfrontierproductionfunctionforpaneldata.EmpiricalEconomics,20,325332.
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0004http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0003http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0002http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0001


16/16
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0064http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0064http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0064http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0064http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0064http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0064http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0063http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0063http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0062http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0062http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0061http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0061http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0060http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0060http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0060http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0060http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0060http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0059http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0059http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0058http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0058http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0058http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0058http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0057http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0057http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0057http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0057http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0056http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0056http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0056http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0056http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0055http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0055http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0055http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0055http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0055http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0054http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0054http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0054http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0054http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0053http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0053http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0052http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0052http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0051http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0051http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1351847X.2014.1003314http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0049http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0049http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0049http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0049http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0048http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0048http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0047http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0047http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0047http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0047http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0046http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0046http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0046http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0046http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0045http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0045http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0045http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0045http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0044http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0044http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0044http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0044http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0043http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0043http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0042http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0042http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0042http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0042http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0041http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0041http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0041http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0041http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0040http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0040http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0040http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0040http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0040http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0039http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0039http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0039http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0039http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0039http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0039http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0038http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0038http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0038http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0038http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0038http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0037http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0037http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0037http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0037http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0036http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0036http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0036http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0036http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0036http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0035http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0035http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0035http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0035http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0034http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0034http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0034http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0034http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0034http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0033http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0033http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0033http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0033http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0032http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0032http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0032http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0032http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0031http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0031http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0031http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0031http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0031http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0030http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0030http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0030http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0030http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0029http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0029http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0029http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0029http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0028http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0028http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0028http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0028http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0027http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0027http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0026http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0026http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0026http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0026http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0026http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0025http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0025http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0025http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0025http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0024http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0024http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0024http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0024http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0024http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0023http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0023http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0023http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0023http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0022http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0022http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0022http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0022http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0022http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0021http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0021http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0021http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0021http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0020http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0020http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0020http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0020http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0020http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0019http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0019http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0019http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0019http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0019http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0018http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0018http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0017http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0017http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0017http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0017http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0016http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0016http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0016http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0016http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0015http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0015http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0015http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0015http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0015http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0015http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0014http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0014http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0014http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0014http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0014http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0013http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0013http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0012http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0012http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0012http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0012http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0012http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0011http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0011http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0011http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0011http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0011http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0009http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0009http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0009http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0009http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0008http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0008http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0008http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177-7/sbref0008http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0377-2217(15)01177

Paper Banca China

Documents

Transcript of Paper Banca China